Przejdź do głównej zawartości


HOW DID WE GET HERE?
(a thread of threads, quotes, and links)

This is a collection of writings and research concerned with how we got where we are today, which is in fact the story of what has been done *to* us, and what has been *taken from us*.

By "us" we're talking about "the 99%", "workers", "wage slaves", all non-owners of private property, "the poor", unhoused people, indigenous people, even plenty of people who swear by capitalism and identify as "capitalist" yet have no capital of their own and no serious hope of ever having any worth speaking of. In other words almost everyone except for the very few who have had the power to exploit us and shape our lives to serve their agenda. We're going to examine institutions and concepts that have deeply altered our world at all levels, both our external and internal realities.

By "here" we are talking about climate crisis and myriad other environmental catastrophes resulting from hyper-excessive extraction, consumption and waste; a world of rampant inequality, exploitation and oppression, hunger and starvation, genocide and war; a world of fences, walls, gatekeepers, prisons, police, bullshit jobs and criminalized poverty; a world overrun with cars and preventable disease; a world of vanishing biodiversity and blooming fascism; a world where "democracy" results in being led by some of the worst of humanity; a world ruled by an imaginary but all-powerful and single-minded god: Capital.

Our inspiration and structural framework for this survey is this quote from "The Prehistory of Private Property", an important work from political philosopher Karl Widerquist and anthropologist Grant S. McCall:

"After hundreds of millennia in which all humans had direct access to the commons, it took only a few centuries for enclosure, colonialism, capitalism, and industrialization to cut off the vast majority of people on Earth from direct access to the means of economic production and therefore to rob them of the power to say no. It took only a few generations to convince most people that this situation was natural and inevitable. That false lesson needs to be unlearned."

https://widerquist.com/books-3/#2b

Also recommended: "Prehistoric Myths in Modern Political Philosophy"

https://widerquist.com/books-3/#4b

#capitalism #colonialism #enclosure #PrivateProperty #state #police #inequality #anthropology #environment #ClimateCrisis #economics

1/30
After hundreds of millennia in which all humans had direct access to the commons, it took only a few centuries for enclosure, colonialism, capitalism, and industrialization to cut off the vast majority of people on Earth from direct access to the means of economic production and therefore to rob them of the power to say no. It took only a few generations to convince most people that this situation was natural and inevitable. That false lesson needs to be unlearned.
A big part of this false lesson is the fantasized history that serves as its foundation; the stories we've been told and the assumptions we've been conditioned with.

To introduce us to "A new understanding of human history and the roots of inequality" here is the TED talk by archaeologist David Wengrow (link includes transcript):

https://www.ted.com/talks/david_wengrow_a_new_understanding_of_human_history_and_the_roots_of_inequality/transcript?language=en

2/30
...our whole picture of human history that we’ve been telling for centuries, it’s basically wrong.
To explore this new understanding further here is a more detailed look at the stories we've been told and who has been telling them:

"How to change the course of human history (at least, the part that’s already happened)"
by anthropologist David Graeber and David Wengrow:

https://www.eurozine.com/change-course-human-history/

3/30
The pieces are all there to create an entirely different world history. For the most part, we’re just too blinded by our prejudices to see the implications.
Understanding the state of things requires us to understand The State. Here's a crash course:

What Is The State? A helpful thread from @HeavenlyPossum
https://kolektiva.social/@HeavenlyPossum/113034394722266469

The State, Our Ancient Enemy
https://www.thecommoner.org.uk/the-state-our-ancient-enemy/

Here is another aspect of state, and another example of accepted narratives that need to be questioned in light of actual evidence. It turns out we can probably thank state for #patriarchy:

How did patriarchy actually begin?
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20230525-how-did-patriarchy-actually-begin

More info about roles of men and women in past societies:

Shattering the myth of men as hunters and women as gatherers
https://phys.org/news/2023-06-shattering-myth-men-hunters-women.html

Worldwide survey kills the myth of ‘Man the Hunter’
https://www.science.org/content/article/worldwide-survey-kills-myth-man-hunter

4/30
The State is an apparatus that establishes the conditions for control — not for all, but for those who wield its power.
Ten wpis został zedytowany (2 miesiące temu)
Next we're going to meet a monster and do our best to kill it. This monster is the ghost of the man John Locke, a philosopher known as "the father of liberalism". We're going to spend some time dragging Locke through the mud because his ideas became a linchpin in our whole system of property, justifying atrocities that continue even as we read this together now. It's not that Locke was single-handedly responsible for our plight, but he does serve as an example of the kind of men who used high-sounding words and "moral" arguments to draw us all into a nightmare that enables *them* to "live the dream".

We'll start with this excerpt from an article by political economist @blair_fix "Can the World Get Along Without Natural Resources?" (by all means read the entire excellent article, but for now this excerpt serves our purposes):

"The original sin

From its outset, the field of political economy was not designed, in any meaningful sense, to understand resource flows. Instead, it was designed to explain *class relations*. The goal of early political economists was to justify the income of different classes (workers, landowners and capitalists). They chose to do so by rooting this income in the ‘production of wealth’. What followed from this original sin was centuries of conflating income with ‘production’. This conflation is what allowed Robert Solow to proclaim that the world could “get along without natural resources”.

Let’s retrace this flawed thinking. It starts with a failure to understand property rights. Political economists largely understand property as a productive asset — a way of thinking that dates to the 17th-century work of John Locke (or perhaps earlier). Locke proclaimed that property rights stemmed from ‘natural law’. A man, Locke argued, has a natural right to own what he ‘produces’:
_____

...every Man has a Property in his own Person. This no Body has any Right to but himself. The Labour of his Body, and the Work of his Hands, we may say, are properly his. Whatsoever then he removes out of the State that Nature hath provided, and left it in, he hath mixed his Labour with, and joyned to it something that is his own, and thereby makes it his Property. It being by him removed from the common state Nature placed it in, hath by this labour something annexed to it, that excludes the common right of other Men. For this Labour being the unquestionable Property of the Labourer, no man but he can have a right to what that is once joyned to, at least where there is enough, and as good left in common for others.
_____

Locke’s thinking became known as the ‘labor theory of property’. This theory (and its derivatives) is why political economists misunderstand the role of natural resources. Here’s what happens. If we accept Locke’s argument that you have a right to own what you produce, it follows that your wealth should stem from your output.

Most political economists after Locke accepted this reasoning (at least in part). That meant that the debate was not about whether wealth was ‘produced’, but rather, about *which* ‘factors of production’ were ‘productive’. The physiocrats thought land alone was productive. Marx insisted that only labor was productive. Neoclassical economists proclaimed that, alongside labor, capital too was productive. The debate between these schools played out over centuries. The problem, though, is that it’s based on a flawed premise. The debate assumes that value is ‘produced’. (It’s not.)

To see the flaw, let’s go back to Locke’s theory of property rights. Notice that it’s not really a ‘theory’ in the scientific sense. It doesn’t explain *why* property rights exist. It explains why they *ought* to exist. Locke proclaimed that a man ought to own what he produces. That is his ‘natural right’.

This change from ‘is’ to ‘ought’ is important. It means that we’re not dealing with a scientific theory. We’re dealing with a system of *morality*. The philosopher David Hume was perhaps the first to understand this moral sleight of hand. He noticed that moral philosophers made their arguments more convincing by framing what ‘ought’ to be in terms of what ‘is’. Here’s Hume reflecting on this trick:
_____

In every system of morality, which I have hitherto met with, I have always remarked, that the author proceeds for some time in the ordinary way of reasoning, and establishes the being of a God, or makes observations concerning human affairs; when of a sudden I am surprised to find, that instead of the usual copulations of propositions, is, and is not, I meet with no proposition that is not connected with an ought, or an ought not. This change is imperceptible; but is, however, of the last consequence.
_____

With David Hume’s observation in mind, let’s return to Locke’s ‘theory’ of property. It’s not a ‘theory’ at all — it’s a moral treatise. According to Locke, we *ought* to own what we produce. But that doesn’t mean that we *do*.

To see the consequences of this mistake, we need an actual scientific theory of property rights — a theory that explains why property exists, not why it ‘ought’ to exist. The most convincing theory of private property, in my opinion, comes from the work of Jonathan Nitzan and Shimshon Bichler. To understand property, Nitzan and Bichler argue that we should turn Locke’s idea on its head. Property isn’t a ‘natural right’. It’s an act of *power*.

Property, Nitzan and Bichler observe, is an act of exclusion. If I own something, that means that I have the right to exclude others from using it. It’s this exclusionary power that defines private property. Here are Nitzan and Bichler describing this act:
_____

The most important feature of private ownership is not that it enables those who own, but that it disables those who do not. Technically, anyone can get into someone else’s car and drive away, or give an order to sell all of Warren Buffet’s shares in Berkshire Hathaway. The sole purpose of private ownership is to prevent us from doing so. In this sense, private ownership is wholly and only an institution of exclusion, and institutional exclusion is a matter of organized power.
_____

When we think like Nitzan and Bichler, we get a very different view of income. Recall that most political economists see property in terms of the ‘things’ that are owned. They then argue that income stems from these ‘things’. Nitzan and Bichler upend this logic. Property, they argue, is about the *act* of ownership — the institutional act of exclusion. Income stems from this exclusionary act. We earn income from the *fence* of property rights, not from what’s inside the fence. In other words, if you can’t restrict access to your property, you can’t earn income from it."

https://economicsfromthetopdown.com/2020/06/18/can-the-world-get-along-without-natural-resources/

5/30
We earn income from the fence of property rights, not from what’s inside the fence.
Ten wpis został zedytowany (3 tygodnie temu)
More on Locke and others like him from "The Prehistory of Private Property":

"Locke could hardly have been unaware that his theory provided a justification for an ongoing process disappropriating European commoners and indigenous peoples alike or that that process amounted to redistribution without compensation from poor to rich. This observation raises serious doubts that the principles contemporary propertarians have inherited from him reflect some deeper commitment to nonaggression or noninterference.

Lockeanism eventually revolutionized the world’s conception of what property was by portraying full liberal ownership as if it were something natural that had always existed, even though it was only then being established by enclosure and colonialization. Lockean and propertarian *stories* might have been more important than their *theories* in that effort. The “original appropriator” in Locke’s story resembles European colonialists rather than prehistoric indigenous North Americans who first farmed the continent. Locke’s appropriator establishes the fee-simple rights that colonial governments (building a global cash economy) tend to establish rather than the complex, overlapping rights indigenous farmers in stateless societies tend to establish."

"The intent of Blackstone, Locke, Grotius, and other early modern property theorists was not to describe what property actually was or even what kind of institutions most people wanted at the time. Instead, it was “a common strategy of claiming the ground of property so as to preempt serious consideration of alternatives like common property” [Olsen,E. J. 2019, “The Early Modern ‘Creation’ of Property and its Enduring influence,” European Journal of Political Theory, Online Early, 1–23]. In that way, private property theory furnished propaganda for the enclosure and colonial movements that forcibly established that institution around the world."

https://widerquist.com/books-3/#2b

7/30
...private property theory furnished propaganda for the enclosure and colonial movements that forcibly established that institution around the world.
Ten wpis został zedytowany (4 miesiące temu)
Let's spend some time looking at Enclosure both historically and as a continuing reality. We'll start with a quick look at one small example of how people organized life on their own just before having it turned upside down by Enclosure:

@HeavenlyPossum on the Irish rundale system of common property:

https://kolektiva.social/@HeavenlyPossum/110219111305684330

8/30
...these people made it work, for centuries, on their own, by choice.
Ten wpis został zedytowany (2 lata temu)
Looking further back we see that humans all over the globe have been actively managing our environment successfully and sustainably for many millennia, which reveals falsehoods embedded in the Lockean (white, European, patriarchal) view of humanity, history and land use. From the research article "People have shaped most of terrestrial nature for at least 12,000 years":

"The current biodiversity crisis is often depicted as a struggle to preserve untouched habitats. Here, we combine global maps of human populations and land use over the past 12,000 y with current biodiversity data to show that nearly three quarters of terrestrial nature has long been shaped by diverse histories of human habitation and use by Indigenous and traditional peoples. With rare exceptions, current biodiversity losses are caused not by human conversion or degradation of untouched ecosystems, but rather by the appropriation, colonization, and intensification of use in lands inhabited and used by prior societies. Global land use history confirms that empowering the environmental stewardship of Indigenous peoples and local communities will be critical to conserving biodiversity across the planet.

"Archaeological and paleoecological evidence shows that by 10,000 BCE, all human societies employed varying degrees of ecologically transformative land use practices, including burning, hunting, species propagation, domestication, cultivation, and others that have left long-term legacies across the terrestrial biosphere. Yet, a lingering paradigm among natural scientists, conservationists, and policymakers is that human transformation of terrestrial nature is mostly recent and inherently destructive. Here, we use the most up-to-date, spatially explicit global reconstruction of historical human populations and land use to show that this paradigm is likely wrong. Even 12,000 y ago, nearly three quarters of Earth’s land was inhabited and therefore shaped by human societies, including more than 95% of temperate and 90% of tropical woodlands. Lands now characterized as “natural,” “intact,” and “wild” generally exhibit long histories of use, as do protected areas and Indigenous lands, and current global patterns of vertebrate species richness and key biodiversity areas are more strongly associated with past patterns of land use than with present ones in regional landscapes now characterized as natural. The current biodiversity crisis can seldom be explained by the loss of uninhabited wildlands, resulting instead from the appropriation, colonization, and intensifying use of the biodiverse cultural landscapes long shaped and sustained by prior societies. Recognizing this deep cultural connection with biodiversity will therefore be essential to resolve the crisis."
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2023483118

Those in power have been telling us that *we* (people in general or "human nature") are the problem. Popular narratives insist that humans and agriculture of any kind are intrinsically and inevitably destructive to the biosphere.

The actual evidence tells us otherwise:

@HeavenlyPossum on "Tells" (archeology):
"And here these farmers sat, year after year, millennia after millennia, in one place. These were people working with the same Neolithic agricultural package, growing the same sorts of wheat and raising the same sorts of sheep, in the fields around their tells.
They did not die out. They did not exhaust their soils to extinction. Many of them — especially the tells in the Danube Basin that constitute “Old Europe” — developed no states, as some people believe is inevitable from wheat cultivation. If they did leave, they left for reasons unrelated to the success of their way of life. But, as I noted, some of these tells are still inhabited, like the central citadel of Aleppo in Syria."
https://kolektiva.social/@HeavenlyPossum/113367947919067023

Milpas
Based on the agronomy of the Maya and of other Mesoamerican peoples, the milpa system is used to produce crops of maize, beans, and squash without employing artificial pesticides and artificial fertilizers...
A milpa is a field, usually but not always recently cleared, in which farmers plant a dozen crops at once including maize, avocados, multiple varieties of squash and bean, melon, tomatoes, chilis, sweet potato, jícama, amaranth, and mucuna ... Milpa crops are nutritionally and environmentally complementary...
The milpa, in the estimation of H. Garrison Wilkes, a maize researcher at the University of Massachusetts in Boston, "is one of the most successful human inventions ever created."
The concept of milpa is a sociocultural construct rather than simply a system of agriculture. It involves complex interactions and relationships between farmers, as well as distinct personal relationships with both the crops and land. For example, it has been noted that "the making of milpa is the central, most sacred act, one which binds together the family, the community, the universe ... [it] forms the core institution of Indian society in Mesoamerica and its religious and social importance often appear to exceed its nutritional and economic importance."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milpa

Evidence confirms an anthropic origin of Amazonian Dark Earths
First described over 120 years ago in Brazil, Amazonian Dark Earths (ADEs) are expanses of dark soil that are exceptionally fertile and contain large quantities of archaeological artifacts... Archaeological research provides clear evidence that their widespread formation in lowland South America was concentrated in the Late Holocene, an outcome of sharp human population growth that peaked towards 1000 BP
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-31064-2

The Supposedly Pristine, Untouched Amazon Rainforest Was Actually Shaped By Humans
"Perhaps [...] the very biodiversity we want to preserve is not only due to thousands of years of natural evolution but also the result of the human footprint on them," Iriarte says. "The more we learn, the more the evidence point to the latter."
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/pristine-untouched-amazonian-rainforest-was-actually-shaped-humans-180962378/

Lost Cities of the Amazon Discovered From the Air
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/lost-cities-of-the-amazon-discovered-from-the-air-180980142/

Easter Island study casts doubt on theory of ‘ecocide’ by early population
https://www.theguardian.com/science/article/2024/jun/21/easter-island-study-casts-doubt-on-theory-of-ecocide-by-early-population

The truth about Easter Island: a sustainable society has been falsely blamed for its own demise
https://theconversation.com/the-truth-about-easter-island-a-sustainable-society-has-been-falsely-blamed-for-its-own-demise-85563

Debunking the “Ecocide” Myth: The Real Story of Easter Island
https://scitechdaily.com/debunking-the-ecocide-myth-the-real-story-of-easter-island/

Climate change, not human population growth, correlates with Late Quaternary megafauna declines in North America
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-21201-8

On Navajo Lands, Ancient Ways Are Restoring the Parched Earth
https://e360.yale.edu/features/navajo-natural-infrastructure-dryland-streams

Rather than human nature, agriculture, or over population, the cause of our current nightmare of environmental destruction originated with a specific group of people who had the power to enforce their exploitation and pillaging over the entire globe eventually. We'll look more later at the disastrous results of colonialism and capitalism.

9/30

Archeologists use a term, “tell,” which originates in Arabic as “تَلّ” meaning a small hill or mound.

These are not naturally occurring hills. Rather, they are formed when a community lives in the same place for so long, generation after generation, that their refuse—food and animal waste, building materials, etc—is deposited and builds up faster than it can be eroded by wind and rain. New houses are built atop the ruins of the old, year after year.

They’re found primarily in southwest Asia, thanks to the often arid conditions there (and hence the borrowing from Arabic), but they’re also found in parts of Europe and Africa.

Some of them are truly massive, reaching up to 43 meters in height. That’s thousands of years’ worth of habitation, compressed in layer atop layer. Archeologists can excavate these sites (those that don’t have modern cities built atop them) and see how communities evolved from the Neolithic to the Iron Age.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tell_(archaeology)

The current biodiversity crisis can seldom be explained by the loss of uninhabited wildlands, resulting instead from the appropriation, colonization, and intensifying use of the biodiverse cultural landscapes long shaped and sustained by prior societies.
Ten wpis został zedytowany (1 miesiąc temu)
With all the above context in mind let us examine the process of Enclosure.

Here is an introduction to "The Tragedy of the Commons" from @HeavenlyPossum:

https://kolektiva.social/@HeavenlyPossum/109449321659418326

10/30
There is no such thing as the tragedy of the commons.
Here is an insightful, extensive and detailed look at the history of Enclosure in Britain and the so-called "Tragedy of the Commons":

A Short History of Enclosure in Britain
https://www.thelandmagazine.org.uk/articles/short-history-enclosure-britain

11/30
The physical fences and hedges that staked out the private ownership of the fields of England, are shadowed by the metaphorical fences that now delineate more sophisticated forms of private property.
Ten wpis został zedytowany (2 miesiące temu)
@HeavenlyPossum on the enclosure of our roads and car dependency as capitalist rent:

https://kolektiva.social/@HeavenlyPossum/110123111646315678

(for more horrifying details of car culture see this article which fleshes out the statistics very well though it falls short by only dealing with superficial causes and solutions:
https://devonzuegel.com/post/we-should-be-building-cities-for-people-not-cars )

12/30
What was once yours and free is now theirs, accessible only for a price.
- An investigation into money, credit, and the social role of landlords:

https://kolektiva.social/@HeavenlyPossum/110108848618951452

14/30
...the production of money and credit are monopolized by the state and its private partners. Credit production was taken from us - enclosed - so someone else could profit.
The result of all this has been to force us into a "market society".

@HeavenlyPossum on the imposition of markets and the demolition of society:

https://kolektiva.social/@HeavenlyPossum/110182089285428195

15/30
This is not a condition we simply found ourselves in. It did not sneak up on us. It was imposed on us, often quite violently and in the face of considerable resistance.
Another quote from "The Prehistory of Private Property":

"No argument about the freedom to appropriate can support the market economy, because capitalism makes people no freer to appropriate property than the common property regime, public property regime, or any other system. A person born into the contemporary market economy is as unfree to appropriate land as a person born to a common property regime or a public property regime that allows no private landownership. The right to appropriate scarce resources, as economist define the term (i.e. anything with a monetary value), is inconsistent with a system of equal freedom from coercion. The propertyless today are not and cannot be equally free to appropriate.

"Lomasky’s “liberty to acquire” holdings actually means the “liberty” to purchase goods. That’s not a liberty at all. That’s a positive opportunity. The goods you are expected to buy are made out of resources you have forcibly been excluded from using yourself. The chance to take orders from one resource owner so that you can “earn” the right to buy goods from other resource owners might be useful, but it is not freedom from some form of coercion that exists in societies with a common property regime."

16/30
The goods you are expected to buy are made out of resources you have forcibly been excluded from using yourself.
Here is @AdrianRiskin on the role of state violence in market society:

State Violence, The Diamond/Water Paradox, and an Invisible Axiom of Classical Economics

https://chez-risk.in/2023/01/29/state-violence-the-diamond-water-paradox-and-an-invisible-axiom-of-classical-economics/

17/30
Without state violence there would be no capitalist economy... and prices of things would be very different than they are now.
Ok, so capitalism can be a tad harsh 🙄 , but we are told it's worth it because capitalism has "lifted billions out of poverty!" and that even the poor of today are wealthier than kings of old. Let's unpack these claims and take a close look at the concepts of "wealth" and "poverty".

@HeavenlyPossum on Wealth

https://kolektiva.social/@HeavenlyPossum/110043938013023300

18/30
Wealth, then, is not a measure of stuff. It is a measure of social power over others, mediated through ownership and prices.
"Capitalism and extreme poverty: A global analysis of real wages, human height, and mortality since the long 16th century"

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X22002169

Highlights:

- The common notion that extreme poverty is the “natural” condition of humanity and only declined with the rise of capitalism rests on income data that do not adequately capture access to essential goods.

- Data on real wages suggests that, historically, extreme poverty was uncommon and arose primarily during periods of severe social and economic dislocation, particularly under colonialism.

- The rise of capitalism from the long 16th century onward is associated with a decline in wages to below subsistence, a deterioration in human stature, and an upturn in premature mortality.

- In parts of South Asia, sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America, wages and/or height have still not recovered.

- Where progress has occurred, significant improvements in human welfare began only around the 20th century. These gains coincide with the rise of anti-colonial and socialist political movements.

Abstract:

"This paper assesses claims that, prior to the 19th century, around 90% of the human population lived in extreme poverty (defined as the inability to access essential goods), and that global human welfare only began to improve with the rise of capitalism. These claims rely on national accounts and PPP exchange rates that do not adequately capture changes in people’s access to essential goods. We assess this narrative against extant data on three empirical indicators of human welfare: real wages (with respect to a subsistence basket), human height, and mortality. We ask whether these indicators improved or deteriorated with the rise of capitalism in five world regions - Europe, Latin America, sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia and China – using the chronology put forward by world-systems theorists. The evidence we review here points to three conclusions. (1) It is unlikely that 90% of the human population lived in extreme poverty prior to the 19th century. Historically, unskilled urban labourers in all regions tended to have wages high enough to support a family of four above the poverty line by working 250 days or 12 months a year, except during periods of severe social dislocation, such as famines, wars, and institutionalized dispossession – particularly under colonialism. (2) The rise of capitalism caused a dramatic deterioration of human welfare. In all regions studied here, incorporation into the capitalist world-system was associated with a decline in wages to below subsistence, a deterioration in human stature, and an upturn in premature mortality. In parts of South Asia, sub-Saharan Africa, and Latin America, key welfare metrics have still not recovered. (3) Where progress has occurred, significant improvements in human welfare began several centuries after the rise of capitalism. In the core regions of Northwest Europe, progress began in the 1880s, while in the periphery and semi-periphery it began in the mid-20th century, a period characterized by the rise of anti-colonial and socialist political movements that redistributed incomes and established public provisioning systems."

edited 8 Oct 2024 to add this side note:

You may encounter pro-capitalism arguments that offer supposed evidence from data presented at a site called "Our World In Data" (often quoted by mainstream journalists). Do not take anything from that site at face value! The data presented is often incomplete, cherry-picked, manipulated, and not standardized properly. Biases are ignored and uncertainties treated as fact. Here is a revealing article about the people and agenda behind that site:

The Unbearable Anthropocentrism of Our World in Data
https://www.counterpunch.org/2024/07/26/the-unbearable-anthropocentrism-of-our-world-in-data/

21/30
Ten wpis został zedytowany (2 miesiące temu)
Let's continue to look at the real results of capitalism, colonialism, state, and the religious rituals of "economics" - environmental destruction, violent coercion and exploitation of humans:

How Colonialism Spawned and Continues to Exacerbate the Climate Crisis

https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2022/09/21/how-colonialism-spawned-and-continues-to-exacerbate-the-climate-crisis/

22/30
..the term ["Anthropocene Epoch"] assumes the climate crisis is caused by universal human nature, rather than the actions of a minority of colonialists, capitalists, and patriarchs. 
...the implication that the Earth was stable until around 1950, when the ‘Anthropocene’ supposedly began, denies the history of people who have been exploited by those systems for centuries.
Ten wpis został zedytowany (2 lata temu)
Here is @KevinCarson1 on the Victims of Capitalism (note this was published in May 2020, if written now it would also include millions more deaths due to capitalism's failure to prioritize human safety and well-being, throwing us under the bus of the SARS-Cov-2 pandemic in favor of an imaginary entity "the economy"):

https://c4ss.org/content/52864

23/30
To go off on a tangent for just a moment: we should be clear that we are not going to be rescued by converting our cars to electricity or by switching our current insane energy "needs" to "renewable" sources. Technology will not save us. We are not going to be able to have our cake and eat it too:

The Rising Chorus of Renewable Energy Skeptics
The green techno-dream is so vastly destructive, they say, ‘we have to come up with a different plan.’

https://thetyee.ca/Analysis/2023/04/07/Rising-Chorus-Renewable-Energy-Skeptics/

Do I report what I’ve learned about solar PVs - or live with it, privately?

https://katiesinger.substack.com/p/do-i-report-what-ive-learned-about

24/30
Enclosure continues, in the name of "green capitalism":

"‘They Will Die’: Tesla-Linked Mining Project Is Devastating One of the World’s Uncontacted Peoples"
https://www.vice.com/en/article/wxj8wm/uncontacted-tribe-threatened-indonesia

"Green Jobs or Greenwashing?"
Unequal exchange, extractivism, and colonialism in the new energy economy
https://maxwilbert.substack.com/p/green-jobs-or-greenwashing

25/30

#environment #colonialism #greenwashing #capitalism #ClimateJustice #ClimateCrisis #Indigenous
Ten wpis został zedytowany (2 tygodnie temu)
How is it that we are not all rising up against all these horrors? How are so many fooled for so long, scammed into supporting a system that treats us as a resource to be consumed? This is a huge subject worthy of it's own project. Investigate the term "capitalist realism" and Gramsci's concept of "cultural hegemony":

Capitalist Realism (Wikipedia)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalist_Realism

Cultural Hegemony (Wikipedia)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_hegemony

Ideology: Coercion's Spin Doctor
https://www.thecommoner.org.uk/ideology-coercions-spin-doctor/

26/30
Ten wpis został zedytowany (2 miesiące temu)

Ugly Bag of Mostly Waterudostępnił to.

Think about the stories and characters we are presented with in popular fiction, the endless supply of cop shows on TV, the rags to riches stories; examine the many assumptions built-into every aspect of our lives, planted there by institutions both of control and recreation (interesting word that: our engaging in recreation can *re-create* the capitalist program).

For now we'll just touch on this with some thought-provoking examples.

From @AdrianRiskin - Why Are Children Forced To Study Mathematics At Gunpoint?

https://chez-risk.in/2023/04/05/why-are-children-forced-to-study-mathematics-at-gunpoint/

27/30

In the United States children are required to study mathematics for most of the time they’re required to attend school and yet essentially everyone hates it. Not just students, but parents and teachers as well. Very few remember any of it once they’re done with school, which strongly suggests that all those years of mandatory mathematics education aren’t serving the students themselves. If they were it wouldn’t be necessary to criminalize nonattendance, to force children into schools to learn mathematics at the point of a policeman’s gun.

Americans are not necessarily docile in the face of government-imposed educational requirements1 and yet they are docile with respect to mandatory mathematics. Intense government propaganda on the goodness of STEM education surely encourages this. Such propaganda rarely consists of more than unsupported claims that STEM training prepares future generations to be happy in their work, which, translated, means that it prepares children to enter or to remain in the middle or upper class.2

Even the acronym STEM, which stands for Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics, is part of the propaganda. In actual practice these fields have little in common other than that capitalism requires a lot of people trained in them and even more people with the deeply felt and formative experiences of shame and failure associated with their study.3 There’s no reason other than the needs of capital to group these subjects together.4

The expenditure of significant resources is required to maintain the math education social system and yet, not only do most kids not know any math when they graduate, but there’s really no reliable body of knowledge one can assume they have on graduation beyond knowing how to read.5 So the people who have the power to create and maintain this social system aren’t expending all the necessary resources solely to create a bunch of mathematicians, scientists, and technologists.6 Why are they spending it?

Whatever they’re after it must be valuable given the value of the resources committed to the project. These don’t just include money for staff, supplies, and real property, but also a range of other complex and expensive institutions, roles, and physical plants. Universities are necessary to train teachers, school administrators, and the professors who train these people. Laws, cops, courts, and jails are required to mete out the violence necessary to get kids into the system and keep them there.7 Universities also train the people who staff these institutions. The entire work of all these systems isn’t dedicated solely to mathematics education but some valuable fraction of it is. This incomplete list of the costs willingly paid by capital to support mandatory mathematics education shows its high value.

Resistance is one of capitalism’s perennial problems, to which one of its perennial solutions is camouflage. When judging potential profits capital must take potential resistance into account and weigh the potential gains against the increased risk of exposure and its subsequent threats to stability. The process of creating and maintaining mandatory schooling has been no exception to this process. Instituting such a complex and comprehensive social system over the last 150 years has required many risks to capital, taken to maintain and extend its ability to extract value from people.

Which is why even now capital has to sell us on the benefits of violently enforced mandatory schooling by touting the benefits of forcing other people’s children rather than our own. No one wants guns pointed at their own kids but at least some are willing to point them at other people’s kids if it suits their needs. There was, is, and will be popular resistance to capital’s daring, risky, and ongoing project. Mandatory schooling is a site where the contradictions of capital are close to the surface, increasing the risk of ongoing and recurrent resistance.

Such risks measure capital’s valuation of the system.8 When mandatory schooling was first proposed there was a great deal of resistance, and why wouldn’t there be? Capital uses the system in part to reproduce a self-replicating working class whose members will send their kids to be transformed into workers without being directly forced to do so. Before this was normalized it didn’t look attractive to the people it acted on, and it still doesn’t if considered too closely.

This answer, that capital requires its victims to undergo twelve years of mandatory math education to maintain its self-reproducing working class, is correct, but it’s not at all clear how this process got started and how works. Also it’s easy and tempting to reframe as a conspiracy theory, making it easily dismissable by people who haven’t spent time sitting with the facts. Zillionaires didn’t get together at Davos and plan it all out step by step like an algorithm. It’s the unplanned but very carefully managed result of centuries of selection and equilibration.9

How this process got started and why conspiracy theories aren’t required to explain its continued existence are topics beyond the scope of this post, which is only about how mathematics education serves capital.10 That is, about what capital gets in exchange for the valuable resources it commits to the project from the twelve years of mathematics education which it requires of our kids. Some kids do learn mathematics and the intrinsic value of such kids to capital is clear in that capital needs technocrats and the kids who do learn some math are good fits for that role. But mathematics is far from all of what gets learned in math class.

Kids don’t all learn math but they all learn something. The grading system, the teacher’s mood, the rewards, the praise, the errors, the humiliation, the corrections, the blurring of the lines between authoritative knowledge and coercive authority, all teach their lessons, some but by no means all of them directly about mathematics. The cultural context of mathematics teaches them other things. They learn that mathematical knowledge grants social power. It allows those who do learn it to talk to teachers, representatives of power, in their own language, a language that the non-math-learners come to realize is the only way particular kinds of truth can effectively be expressed.

Often they learn that their parents aren’t able to help them even with elementary school math homework, which teaches a powerful lesson about their families’ place in the social hierarchy.11 Another important lesson to be learned is that there’s one right answer to every question. No matter what anyone remembers from their math classes, they remember this lie. It helps people to believe that not only are there right answers to find, but that scientists know how to find them, which covers up the role of violence in determining what counts as truth. Mathematics creates a facade of objectivity behind which capital’s violence hides. When violence is the authority behind truth obscuring that fact stabilizes capitalism.

Also mathematical knowledge, although it is not propositional knowledge, can very easily be made to appear to be.12 Algebra is especially vulnerable to this kind of sleight.13 One of the lessons children learn in algebra class is that all important knowledge is propositional knowledge and that it all builds sequentially on prerequisites. That it can and must be learned in even measured steps and that each step represents a uniform quantum of knowledge. If this is true then we must trust the experts because they’ve taken more steps towards the truth than we have. Since there is one right answer there’s one objective truth, and the more steps one has taken towards it the closer to the truth one’s ideas must be.

Mathematics education diverts and repurposes the instinctual human respect for authoritative knowledge by subbing coercive authority into its place.14 The idea that mathematics is the language of science and science the language of truth reinforces the cultural narrative that all truth consists of bloodless propositions, that truth is necessarily detached from human considerations. This in turn acclimates kids to the idea that their own experiences are irrelevant to every possible discussion unless they can be expressed in a reasoned and detached style, effectively silencing a great deal of dissent.

The formal reasoning style associated with mathematics teaches its own lessons. For instance that decontextualization and abstraction are the only valid routes to truth, that the only correct way to understand anything is by analyzing relationships between abstract concepts, because this is how mathematics is taught to kids. This is true throughout K12 mathematics, but it’s very clear in relation to word problems, where students must often suppress their own concrete and specific knowledge in order to get what passes for the right answer.15

For instance, the meaning of the slogan “Black lives matter” relies on its place in a deep and broad historical context involving chattel slavery, police violence, capitalism, racism, prisons, and on and on and on. Part of the context is the understanding that society already acts as if white lives matter without anyone having to say it out loud. Lacking that context, or mapped to a different context, the phrase means something very different. And once decontextualized it becomes conceptually equivalent rather than intentionally and implicitly contrasted to statements like “all lives matter” or “white lives matter.” Even wildly skewed transformations like “blue lives matter” move from absurdity to debatability, which is a win for capital’s stability.

Victims of American mathematics education may be powerfully tempted to refute such nonsense on its own terms, i.e. abstractly rather than by screaming out the concrete truth that’s obvious to anyone who shares the context. We’re tempted to clarify the definitions and explain the distinctions abstractly, which of course is a trap that transforms meaningless claims into debatable claims. We instinctually feel the socially created weakness of arguments that rely on context, on personal, concrete, experiential, spatially localized knowledge. That such arguments are, contrary to this position, not only valid but are arguably the only valid arguments is sufficient explanation for the value of this mathematics-mediated mental trap to capital.

Math teachers can project enthusiasm for extremely esoteric subjects, e.g. into how many distinguishable orders can the letters of the word “MISSISSIPPI” be arranged? Students may take this as affirmation of their own esoteric interests, which marks them as potential techhnocrats.16 Others learn different lessons, e.g. that mathematicians along with the world-rulers they advise aren’t entirely human given their apparent passion for inhuman subjects. Since they’re not entirely human, humans can’t expect to understand their reasoning, let alone the value of their conclusions. It’s better to follow their orders, then, even if it fucks us up personally, and we’ll never be one of them because we’ll never care as much about such things.17

It’s not that such questions aren’t to be enthused over. They are interesting, but no more interesting than any numbeer of other subjects, none of which children are forced at gunpoint to study. The question isn’t whether the topics really are worthy of enthusiasm. The question is why it’s valuable to capital to expend resources pushing this kind of enthusiasm on kids who not only don’t share it but who often have the seeds of their own genuine intrinsic enthusiasms crushed rather than nourished by the system.

I could add plenty of examples but if the point can be made I’ve made it, leaving only my confessions to close this essay. I didn’t create and I don’t control the system I’m describing here, but I do actively work in it, maintain it, benefit from it, so am complicit in its operation. One major benefit I take from the system is that it makes my job possible. Part of that process is that the system creates a market for the skills I teach and violently forces people into that market, all of which contributes to the existence of paid work for me to do. I doubt that without coercion there’d be enough demand for advanced mathematics education to support me personally working at it full time. Without the system providing a steady supply of students for me to teach I wouldn’t have a job.

The system also ensures the feasibility of my job by producing a reliable supply of students prepared to take my classes. The preparation includes the requisite mathematical background, but also the rigorous behavioral training necessary to create students who will sit quietly in class and unquestioningly obey my often-arbitrary commands without the need for overt threats. This is no small accomplishment. It takes years and many, many wasted lives to produce properly trained students.18 That is, capital in general and the mathematics education system in particular benefit me by violently creating conditions which enable me to support my family and myself.

That I benefit from capital’s violence in these particular ways is a form of complicity, but I’m able to see it passive and unavoidable. I have to have a job because capital forces me to work to support my family and myself and most jobs involve this kind of complicity. If I could choose freely I’d choose something very different, which absolves me as much as it absolves everyone who has to work for a living. I’m not sure how much absolution that is, but it’s what’s available.19

I’m also complicit in capital’s violence in ways that I didn’t understand as complicity when I enmeshed myself in them. Many of these relate to my confusion about my purposes for my job and some of them are within my power to change. For instance, during most of my career I assigned letter grades to students based on very normal, very familiar kinds of criteria, with assigned cut-off scores for As, Bs, and so on. As I came to understand capital’s role in creating and shaping the world I began to see that such letter grades didn’t help students to learn mathematics and in many ways hindered learning. I saw that letter grades aren’t designed to help students in any way and in many ways they’re harmful.

They don’t do anything to help students learn mathematics, although they do a lot to shape and rank students according to capital’s needs. If I understand the purpose of my effort to be teaching mathematics to willing students in a human social context rather than furthering capital’s goals there’s no reason at all for me to participate in the system this way. Thus I’ve changed my grading system to implement as much as possible incentives which are good for my students in that they further the intrinsic value of learning mathematics as a social good between me and my students. In that context letter grades are easily seen to be without value, and in fact, as something students need to be protected from if possible.20 There are other ways I’m complicit that are similar to this.

The worst ways in which I’m complicit are those where I knew and know better abstractly than to use my power like that but in order to protect my ego used this knowledge to avoid seeing the concrete badness of my behavior. Briefly, I’m talking about the fact that exercising arbitrary personal power over people can be immediately satisfying and therefore a temptation. Forcing people to comply with arbitrary rules can sooth egos hurt by years of having to obey arbitrary rules, even more so from behind a shield of numeric and, therefore from the point of view of properly trained students, objective and so indisputable grading standards. Peer-validated and therefore righteous anger about plagiarism or other turpitudes can build professional community. All of this is done at the expense of students’ well-being because the punishments are grade-based.

A few failing grades can lead to suspension or expulsion from school or from dorms. This can lead to low pay and lingering student loans without sufficient income to service them, which can mean a whole lifetime of working for other people’s benefit. But a single failing grade doesn’t have much effect by itself. This fact allowed me to avoid facing the implications of grades as a tool of social control. Giving an F grade is like a single firing squad bullet being a blank. Both moves allow killers, both direct and indirect, to imagine that they aren’t guilty, even though all of us are.

Power famously corrupts, which is a pleasantly entertaining aphorism to apply to Henry Kissinger and his ilk but not so much to oneself. Police are the ultimate source of violent power in our society, so expressing personal power in cop-like ways can be an easy and therefore attractive default. I don’t like facing the fact that I’ve acted this way throughout my career and might still be doing it in ways I haven’t come to understand yet. Also I don’t feel like I understand the situation well enough yet to give an complete honest account of my actions.21

And ultimately there’s nothing very special about mathematics in relation to capitalism and compulsory education. The ways in which capital exploits the intersection of mathematics and coercion are specific to mathematics, some of which I’ve described here, but the general system is not. It must in fact be the case that every subject taught in compulsory schools stabilizes capitalism in whatever ways can be used to do so. Certainly capital won’t fund activities that undermine its stability, and activities neutral to capital’s stability don’t exist.22 Making mathematics an elective, therefore, won’t solve the problem, which is due to coercion rather than any inherent qualities of mathematics or other subjects taught in K-12 schools.

I believe the only solution is to abolish compulsory schooling.23 This argument is too much for a brief summary, but it’s based on the simple fact that I can’t see any possible moral justification for compulsory schooling enforced by police at gunpoint, not if my kids are being forced and therefore not if other people’s kids are being forced. I don’t mean we should abolish free public schools, just that attendance should be voluntary. If you disagree is there an argument in favor of forcing children at gunpoint, under threat of violence, to engage in activities that putatively benefit them?
  • If the recent and ongoing fuss over critical race theory teaches us anything it’s this.
  • There are surely many, many reasons why people don’t rebel over mandatory mathematics education or, for that matter, over mandatory education in general. In addition to the propaganda I’d guess that parents wanting their children to be upper or middle class is the most important. Very few people are willing to put ideals before their children’s economic well-being, nor should anyone judge them for this. And of course it’s not just economic well-being that’s at stake. Money protects people from infinitely many dangers, so it’s very, very natural to want this for one’s kids even at the expense of other people’s kids It’s a reliable instinct so capital can rely on it. Any intrinsic goodness associated with STEM stuff is absolutely not a factor, or only a factor for people who already have money.
  • Here’s how I use some words in this essay. “Capitalism” is an economic system that relies on violently excluding people from the means of production in order to force them to submit to exploitation. “Capital” referring to a group of people means the same thing as “the ruling class.” It’s a collective noun for the class of people who are able to control some of the coercive tools of the state, to use them to effect their purposes.
  • If there were it wouldn’t have been necessary to coin the word “STEM,” there would already have been a word, just as there’s already a word, “science,” to describe the commonalities of such disparate fields as physics and sociology.
  • The system does effectively teach them how to read in certain specific ways, which is an important fact. From it one can draw the conclusion that capital actually requires most people to know how to read in these ways, but with respect to mathematics only requires that everyone be put through the system. In order to determine what the system-wielders want out of the systems they wield it’s necessary to look at what comes out rather than what they say is supposed to come out. It’s similar to how the public care systems are very good with respect to fires, moderately with respect to building codes, and very, very bad with respect to health care. This ranking reflects capital’s priorities. The system produces what it’s meant to produce without correlation with what it’s said to be meant to produce, so that the best explanation for a given component of a social system is that someone with the power to modify the rules had a need for the component. Other wielders may well later repurpose the capabilities toward other goals, which doesn’t mean that the tool had to have been created to effect those particular ends. Useful tools are useful in many contexts.
  • There’s a tempting counterargument to this position consisting of a claim that the entire STEM education system functions to create as many mathematicians etc. as can be produced from a given population and that it’s only wasteful because talent in those areas is rare. Thus the math education system, with its massive wastage of human blood and treasure, is like the baseball farm system, which requires a vast apparatus to seek out, sign, and train baseball players who will never make it to the big leagues, but the ones who will also need people to play the game with. Perhaps all the wasted years trying to teach the quadratic formula are the only way to find the next Einstein. This argument is wrong, though, as tempting as it is. One counterargument is capitalism’s famed efficiency. They wouldn’t waste all those kids who don’t learn math as long as money can be made from them, and boy can it ever! Another counterargument is that even if the principle is correct, that mathematical talent is rare and the only way to develop it is with a massive farm system where most students’ roles are limited to providing bodies to keep the system running, even then, whose benefit is this for? To whom is the waste of time, life, resources, labor, and humanity worth it to make sure there are enough scientists for capital to keep moving?
  • There must be violence because violent enforcement is the only distinction between rules and laws.
  • Mandatory schooling is also an effective part of the camouflage system and so tempers risk even while creating it. It’s an error to look for single effects from tools as complex as the mandatory schooling system.
  • This is an audacious claim and it requires a great deal of evidence and argument to make it plausible, which I’m working on producing, but it’s nevertheless correct.
  • I know I do this a lot, and I apologize because I know how frustrating I find it when other people do it. My problem is that there’s too much to explain at once and if I wait till I can do it systematically I’ll never get anything done.
  • It’s also a sufficient explanation for continually changing fashions in elementary math education, although there are plenty of other sufficient conditions, e.g. the publish or perish system of academic advancement. Fashions in education, like many of capital’s processes, are highly overdetermined.
  • By “propositional knowledge” I mean facts that are analytic consequences of definitions and syllogisms. That mathematical knowledge is not of this kind is a difficult argument to make and I can’t make it in this essay. So for instance an algorithm for solving a class of equations, like completing the square, is similar to propositional knowledge, and any given application of it to solve a specific equation probably is mostly propositional knowledge, but the general context in which the algorithm exists is not. This context consists of social relations among mathematicians as a human community, aesthetic and historical judgments regarding which questions are interesting and which arguments are valid, struggles for intra- and intercommunity power, debates over the appropriacy of axioms, and every other aspect of human communities necessary for the creation and maintenance of a body of human knowledge.
  • Which quite likely is a sufficient explanation for the fact that algebra is universally required of K12 students despite the fact that it’s absolutely useless in any normal human context. No one remembers the quadratic formula because the quadratic formula is useless, which is entirely consistent with its discovery and promotion by elite Bablyonian technocrats who had links to coercive state power and therefore many motives in common with contemporary mathematicians under capitalism. In contrast, many people know the Pythagorean theorem whether or not they know what it’s called. It’s the source of any number of folk methods for squaring up corners. The Pythagorean theorem has an existence in folk culture that the quadratic formula has never had and could never have. It’s qualitatively very different from the Pythagorean theorem in this respect.
  • The notion that capital relies on such a process of identifying, diverting, and thereby repurposing universal human instincts to serve the needs of capital is one of the most important historical explanatory tools in the area, along with tool theory.
  • This is the subject of a different essay. Think perhaps of a question like this: A tree grows two feet per year. A kid hammers a nail into the trunk six feet from the ground. How many years until the nail is ten feet from the ground? The correct answer is, well, dependent on how one thinks about tree growth. Abstractly, the answer may arguably be two years, but at least one problem with this solution is that in the actual real world trees grow from the tip rather than from the base. A nail in a trunk six feet above the ground will be six feet above the ground for as long as the tree stands. Also consider word problems where person A can do a task in X hours and person B can do it in Y hours and one is asked to find how long it will take them working together, which rely on the assumption that work rates are additive, that is, that workers are fungible cogs, an assumption only even plausible from capital’s point of view whose utility to capital is obvious. I need to write at least a whole essay on this phenomenon, but this is what I’m talking about here.
  • I can’t overemphasize the extent to which I’m not arguing from any intrinsic bad qualities of mathematics. Mathematics as a human, social activity predates capitalism and predates the coercive state. Mathematical concepts and styles of reasoning have an extensive folk literature, oral as well as written. The human joy in thinking mathematically is yet another quality discovered and exploited by capitalism. In that regard it’s similar to the human joy in sexuality, another not intrinsically bad thing which can be diverted and repurposed in infinitely many very, very bad ways.
  • It’s worth noting here that this point doesn’t require a conspiracy, where capitalists directly order math teachers to magnify their enthusiasms to have this effect. Math teachers do it each for their own individual reasons and capital, noting this tendency on a sociological level, has evolved to take advantage of the protection it offers. No conspiracy beyond ordinary sociological emergence is necessary to explain the phenomenon.
  • I don’t know how this works now, but with respect to wasted lives, when I was in junior high school in the 1970s kids disappeared as the result of behavioral noncompliance all the time. Kids who wouldn’t shut up, sit still, respect authority, remain asexual, respect property, and so on, would just vanish, never to return. This process mostly stopped in high school, because the more primitively rebellious kids had been weeded out. In high school it was the cops who did the weeding out. The result is a bunch of well-trained college students who know how to sit quietly in calculus class.
  • It’s possible that this is a rationalization, but I don’t think it is. Until I gain some clarity on it, though, I’m not going to do anything about it, so it’s unavoidable in the sense that I haven’t thought of a better option yet.
  • I am in the process of writing a paper explaining this, although I won’t be able to finish it until I’m done assessing how well it works. Here’s the current version as of this writing. I’m interested in your thoughts if you have any.
  • Hence my sketchy and passively voiced summary.
  • Here’s a proof by contradiction of that claim. If they’re neutral they’d be evidence that capital doesn’t control every aspect of human life and therefore support the stability of capital in the face of critics who claim otherwise, of which there are many, so not neutral. Thus they don’t exist.
  • I wrote an essay about this recently, but it needs some work.


https://chez-risk.in/2023/04/05/why-are-children-forced-to-study-mathematics-at-gunpoint/

#Capitalism #Coercion #CompulsorySchooling #K12Education #Mathematics #MathematicsEducation #PoliceAbolition #PoliceViolence #Resistance #SocialSystems #Stability #STEMEducation

Ten wpis został zedytowany (2 miesiące temu)
Capital is served by various institutions (property rights and legal codes, corporations, the system of wage labor, law enforcement, military, other religions, education systems, media, white supremacy, colonialism, imperialism, etc), by the billionaires and oligarchs who are its priests and the rulers and politicians who are their henchmen. As Albert Einstein wrote in Monthly Review, May 1949:

"...private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights."

As a result we have unwittingly internalized Capital's demands, to our great detriment. Capital's narrative is deeply embedded into every aspect of our lives.

Note how this quote from the speech "The Three Evils of Society" by Martin Luther King Jr. assumes the Protestant work ethic is a good thing and not itself part of the implanted narrative that serves Capital. Instead of calling it out, MLK tried to distance it from capitalism. So while the second sentence of this quote is very true, the first sentence is an example of the deep conditioning of the narrative of capitalism and its precursors:

"We have deluded ourselves into believing the myth that capitalism grew and prospered out of the Protestant ethic of hard work and sacrifice. The fact is that capitalism was built on the exploitation and suffering of black slaves and continues to thrive on the exploitation of the poor, both black and white, both here and abroad."

Even "Democratic Socialist" Bernie Sanders sadly equates dignity and security with wage slavery:

"This is the United States. We are the richest country on the planet. One job should be enough to live with security and dignity."

David Graeber, from “Debt: The First 5,000 Years”:

"For me, this is exactly what's so pernicious about the morality of debt: the way that financial imperatives constantly try to reduce us all, despite ourselves, to the equivalent of pillagers, eyeing the world simply for what can be turned into money - and then tell us that it's only those who are willing to see the world as pillagers who deserve access to the resources required to pursue anything in life other than money. It introduces moral perversions on almost every level. ("Cancel all student loan debt? But that would be unfair to all those people who struggled for years to pay back their student loans!" Let me assure the reader that, as someone who struggled for years to pay back his student loans and finally did so, this argument makes about as much sense as saying it would be "unfair" to a mugging victim not to mug their neighbors too.)

"The argument might perhaps make sense if one agreed with the underlying assumption - that work is by definition virtuous, since the ultimate measure of humanity's success as a species is its ability to increase the overall global output of goods and services by at least 5 percent per year. The problem is that it is becoming increasingly obvious that if we continue along these lines much longer, we're likely to destroy everything."

As @HeavenlyPossum has commented: "capitalism depends on ignorance of history for its ideological survival". It is the intent of this project to do what we can to remove some of this ignorance, to share the debunking of some of the lies we've been told; to encourage *unlearning the lesson* that has been forced upon us.

28/30
Capitalism depends on ignorance of history for its ideological survival.

Ugly Bag of Mostly Waterudostępnił to.

So, if capitalism, state, and other hierarchical power structures are existential threats to humanity and to the biosphere and therefore must be removed, what does that leave us with?

Anarchy??!

Yes.

From @AdrianRiskin - "Anarchism isn’t a fantasy and it’s not a political theory — it’s a collective name for whatever forms of society can exist without murder as a political tool"

https://chez-risk.in/2023/02/19/anarchism-isnt-a-fantasy-and-its-not-a-political-theory-its-a-collective-name-for-whatever-forms-of-society-can-exist-without-murder-as-a-political-tool/

29/30
Ten wpis został zedytowany (2 miesiące temu)
If you're not already a student of anarchism, then you probably have some very negative ideas about "anarchy" or anarchism. It is beyond the scope of this project to mount a comprehensive defense or explanation of anarchism, but we also don't want to leave you hanging without some guideposts towards further understanding.

Here are a couple popular introductions:

"Are You An Anarchist? The Answer May Surprise You!"
by David Graeber
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/david-graeber-are-you-an-anarchist-the-answer-may-surprise-you

"To Change Everything"
https://crimethinc.com/tce

Here are some pieces dealing with specific common concerns about anarchism:

@HeavenlyPossum on Anarchism and Leadership
https://kolektiva.social/@HeavenlyPossum/113103845709064779

Anarchists Are Not Naive About Human Nature
https://anarchopac.com/2022/02/28/anarchists-are-not-naive-about-human-nature/

The Conspiracy of Law by Howard Zinn
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/howard-zinn-the-conspiracy-of-law

Anarchism and Democracy
https://anarchopac.com/2022/04/15/anarchism-and-democracy/

David Graeber on democracy:
There Never Was a West
Or, Democracy Emerges From the Spaces In Between
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/david-graeber-there-never-was-a-west

[edited 20 Nov 2024 to add this book]
Here is a different take on democracy. This book is not really an introductory sort of text, more like internal anarchist discourse, but as such it offers revealing insights into actual anarchist ideas, practices and experiences. Featuring many fascinating examples and analysis from recent history, grounding it in real life struggle, not just theory.
"From Democracy To Freedom"
The Difference Between Government and Self-Determination
https://crimethinc.com/books/from-democracy-to-freedom
Free PDF: https://cdn.crimethinc.com/assets/books/from-democracy-to-freedom/from-democracy-to-freedom_screen_single_page_view.pdf

Here is a rich survey of anarchistic principles and practices in action in the real world, past and present: "Anarchy Works"
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-anarchy-works

For further research here is a very good reading list ranging from basic introductions to specialized aspects and history of anarchism:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KDEM4AzinLVFQZGDljFriiMwWFn73IIIlp26LwEasK0/edit

30/end

Thread: Anarchism and Leadership

Perhaps you have encountered one or both of these related ideas:

- That every society inevitably has leaders of some kind, or

- That every leader exercises command, so that

- No truly egalitarian society without hierarchy of command is likely or even impossible.

I have frequently seen these arguments deployed in an effort to invalidate anarchism. A summary would go something like this: “anarchism is impossible, or at least we have no evidence that anarchism could be possible, because even the most primitive tribe has chiefs or elders, and these leaders issue commands that must be obeyed.”

I thought it would be worth unpacking this a bit.

1/12

Ten wpis został zedytowany (5 dni temu)
Appendix: EcOnOmIcS!!1!!

If you have ever been told to "go learn some economics!", this post is for you. Here are links to a surplus of valuable thoughts on the subject, starting with the @blair_fix piece that was excerpted in the fifth post of this thread, in case you didn't read the whole thing then:

Can the World Get Along Without Natural Resources?
https://economicsfromthetopdown.com/2020/06/18/can-the-world-get-along-without-natural-resources/

edited 27 Sept 2024 to add this revealing paper from Shimshon Bichler and Jonathan Nitzan on how both liberal/neoclassical and Marxist economists fail at describing anything actually real when it comes to capital:

Capital accumulation: fiction and reality
"What we need now are not better tools, more accurate modelling and improved data, but a different way of thinking altogether, a totally new cosmology for the post-capitalist age."
http://www.paecon.net/PAEReview/issue72/BichlerNitzan72.pdf

A mathematician on the "free market" economic model, excellent thread from @magitweeter
https://mastodon.social/@magitweeter/111653879323307502

David Graeber: Against Economics
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/david-graeber-against-economics

Interesting piece about what supply and demand misses, with important insights about value and market power, poverty and inequality:

Bargaining Power and Prices: A Response to Sanyazi and Carson
https://c4ss.org/content/58918

Exponential Economist Meets Finite Physicist
https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2012/04/economist-meets-physicist/

Free Market Genocides: The Real History of Trade
https://evonomics.com/free-market-genocide-the-real-history-of-trade/

GDP and the Idolatry of Growth from @dsdamato https://www.counterpunch.org/2023/05/25/gdp-and-the-idolatry-of-growth/

The Lie At The Heart Of Consumer Society
https://indica.medium.com/the-lie-at-the-heart-of-consumer-society-1a6fe24d832f

The Problem With Economic Models from @pluralistic https://pluralistic.net/2023/04/03/all-models-are-wrong/#some-are-useful

David Graeber: What is the meaning of money?
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/david-graeber-note-worthy-what-is-the-meaning-of-money

Here's another article from @blair_fix that really belongs here:

The Ritual of Capitalization
https://economicsfromthetopdown.com/2021/06/02/the-ritual-of-capitalization/

For an extensive deep dive into capitalist economics, here is a very thorough examination from An Anarchist FAQ, very much worth your time:

What are the myths of capitalist economics?
https://anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionC.html

"State Capitalism: The Wages System Under New Management" by Adam Buick and John Crump
https://files.libcom.org/files/State%20Capitalism.pdf
The focus of this short book is to argue (very successfully IMO) that individual private ownership is not a defining feature of capitalism and that countries such as China, The Soviet Union (this was published in 1986), Cuba, Vietnam, etc, though they may identify as "socialist" and are called "communist" by many are in fact simply another form of capitalism called "state capitalism". In the process of making this argument, this book also became an excellent general reference for understanding what capitalism really is, how capitalist economics work, what socialism really is and isn't, and plenty of fascinating and clarifying historic context.

I would be remiss not to mention:
"Debt: The First 5,000 Years" by David Graeber, an absolute must-read to better understand the history of debt and money.
https://we.riseup.net/assets/393727/David+Graeber+Debt+The+First+5+000+Years.pdf

#economics #capitalism
Ten wpis został zedytowany (2 miesiące temu)

HeavenlyPossumudostępnił to.

Appendix 2: Prefiguring Degrowth
Confronting Power, Accumulation, and Ecocide

I found this essay to be an excellent overview bringing together many of the same themes presented in this thread, explaining the necessity of an anarchist approach to #degrowth and clearly describing the continuum of hierarchical power structures, #state, #colonialism, #capitalism, #ClimateCrisis and #ecocide. Features solid basic info on #anarchism and #democracy

https://nishikantsheorey.substack.com/p/prefiguring-degrowth
Appendix 2b:
The Climate Movement is Making a Huge Mistake

"Judged by their actions rather than their words, many environmental organizations put more emphasis on sustaining a modern western lifestyle than on sustaining the planet.

They’ve become more focused on what is politically feasible than what is ecologically necessary."

I wish this link wasn't on substack, but I thought it important info and perspective to share!

https://maxwilbert.substack.com/p/the-climate-movement-is-making-a
Appendix 3: Human Nature

Many claims about human nature have been trotted out in defense of the idea that we must be managed or controlled by some higher authority (God, state, rule of law, capital, "the market", so-called "democracy") because we are inevitably violent and selfish, perpetually prone to being oppressed by the ever-present potential tyrants among us, condemned to reproduce hierarchy forever everywhere.

To dispel these non-innocent narratives, here are some @HeavenlyPossum threads that are bursting at the seams with history, archeology and anthropology:

On Anarchism and Leadership
https://kolektiva.social/@HeavenlyPossum/113103845709064779

A survey of some of the ways in which people sustain egalitarian societies against would-be tyrants.
https://kolektiva.social/@HeavenlyPossum/111290743792188200

Neither violent conflict nor peaceful cooperation are inevitable products of human nature, but rather deliberate social choices we can make.
https://kolektiva.social/@HeavenlyPossum/111025312476874870

On the social construction of altruism and egoism.
https://kolektiva.social/@HeavenlyPossum/111466874348514976

An exploration of some of the ways non-state societies deter power-seeking and aggression.
https://kolektiva.social/@HeavenlyPossum/110683095773219652

The state is not necessary for preventing violent aggression, such as murder, and indeed may be worse for that purpose than its absence.
https://kolektiva.social/@HeavenlyPossum/111198577601193102

“Tribal” societies were often more civilized than capitalist modernity is.
https://kolektiva.social/@HeavenlyPossum/110916353874829458

Do people really like living under state rule?
https://kolektiva.social/@HeavenlyPossum/110685130975554822

Some introductory thoughts on the state, hierarchy, and statelessness.
https://kolektiva.social/@HeavenlyPossum/111053356612723637

In their book “The Dawn of Everything,” David Graeber and David Wengrow provide multiple accounts by early European settler colonists of the indigenous societies they encountered in the woodlands of northeastern North America.

Over and over, these Europeans noted that these societies were well and truly stateless, lacking rulers, laws, courts, police, prisons, or anything like what they were used to in Europe.

They quote one Jesuit, writing in 1644 about the Wendat:

“I do not believe that there is any people on earth freer than they, and less able to allow the subjection of their wills to any power whatever – so much so that Fathers here have no control over their children, or Captains over their subjects, or the Laws of the country over any of them, except in so far as each is pleased to submit to them. There is no punishment which is inflicted on the guilty, and no criminal who is not sure that his life and property are in no danger…”

1/ #thread
A 16th-century sketch shows the Indigenous village of Pomeiock, near present-day Gibbs Creek in eastern North Carolina, with huts and longhouses inside a protective palisade, or fence. The sketch was made by an English explorer in 1585.

Ten wpis został zedytowany (2 tygodnie temu)

RDudostępnił to.

How comes that a latecomer to anarchism can't respect an opinion different than yours? You do know how Freedom (not just the one of speech) works, don't you?

Your selection of words adressed to me is rasing my suspicion that you're doing anti- fascism pretty good, even without "anti".
@gfkdsgn@burma.social @HeavenlyPossum

For anyone who is curious what the hell @gfkdsgn@burma.social (blocked) is talking about here (see attached screenshot), they're referring to this post I made:

https://kolektiva.social/@RD4Anarchy/112032565963680451

which was in reply to @gfkdsgn@burma.social chiming in on a post from @luckytran talking about the science on how long covid patients remain contagious:

https://med-mastodon.com/@luckytran/112028843578506032

@gfkdsgn@burma.social's response was to fling this conspiracy theory-based non-sequiturd:

"Do you @luckytran know what these scientists say about survival rate of CoVid-19 vaccines?"
https://burma.social/@gfkdsgn/112029387716643904

They later tried to back this up with a video from Kary Mullis. I replied by sharing some of Mullis' other opinions.

@gfkdsgn

This is the guy who believed in astrology and said he had an encounter with an extraterrestrial in the form of a fluorescent raccoon.

He was a denialist re: human involvement in climate change and ozone layer depletion, and he also questioned the scientific validity of the link between HIV and AIDS, despite never having done any scientific research on either subject.

Please fuck off with this bullshit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kary_Mullis

@municipaladhesives

#covid

screeenshot of post from @gfkdsgn@burma.social

How comes that a latecomer to anarchism can't respect an opinion different than yours? You do know how Freedom (not just the one of speech) works, don't you? 

Your selection of words adressed to me is rasing my suspicion that you're doing anti- fascism pretty good, even without "anti".
Ten wpis został zedytowany (9 miesiące temu)
I really like “non sequiturd”
Appendix 4: One attempt to tell a new story

An area in northeast Syria that’s populated by around five million people and is roughly the size of Belgium, Rojava (Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria) is a vision of hope and a daily struggle full of paradoxes. We have much to learn from this experiment and it's history.

Rojava Revolution: Women’s Liberation, Democracy and Ecology in North-East Syria
https://bioneers.org/rojava-revolution-womens-liberation-democracy-and-ecology-in-north-east-syria-ztvz2406/

Hope and Contradictions: My Year in Rojava
https://www.defendrojava.org/news/hope-and-contradictions-my-year-in-rojava
Ten wpis został zedytowany (5 miesiące temu)
It's a visceral counterpoint to the ridiculous strawman that says anarchists think anarchism is a "magic fix" and also to the lie that "it's never worked".

Also: fuck so-called "anti-imperialist" campists!
Appendix 5: More discoveries challenging conventional ideas about human cultural evolution

Essay by David Wengrow: Beyond Kingdoms and Empires
A revolution in archaeology is transforming our picture of past populations and the scope of human freedoms
https://aeon.co/essays/an-archeological-revolution-transforms-our-image-of-human-freedoms

@HeavenlyPossum thread on the spread of agriculture and the rise of the state:
https://kolektiva.social/@HeavenlyPossum/112864320248967445

@HeavenlyPossum thread on humans' relationship with "wilderness":
https://kolektiva.social/@HeavenlyPossum/112785679516359170

How ghost cities in the Amazon are rewriting the story of civilization
Remote sensing, including lidar, reveals that the Amazon was once home to millions of people. The emerging picture of how they lived challenges ideas of human cultural evolution (archived from NewScientist)
https://archive.ph/vcsip

@HeavenlyPossum thread: The City Without the State—complex urban infrastructure at the Pingliantai Neolithic site
https://kolektiva.social/@HeavenlyPossum/111079324770420934

@HeavenlyPossum thread: The City Without the State—political revolution and social leveling at the Taosi Neolithic site
https://kolektiva.social/@HeavenlyPossum/111098000190597587

Exploring the ways in which residents of Neolithic Çatalhöyük in Anatolia differentiated themselves as well as the ways in which they did not:
https://kolektiva.social/@RD4Anarchy/113097719610217031

Contra the “humans are a virus” discourse that’s popular among eco-fascists and, unfortunately, a sizable segment of the left that likes to imagine other people (but never them) are The Problem, humans have a long history of sustainably and often *beneficially* interacting with their environments.

“Even 12,000 y ago, nearly three quarters of Earth’s land was inhabited and therefore shaped by human societies, including more than 95% of temperate and 90% of tropical woodlands. Lands now characterized as ‘natural,’ ‘intact,’ and ‘wild’ generally exhibit long histories of use, as do protected areas and Indigenous lands, and current global patterns of vertebrate species richness and key biodiversity areas are more strongly associated with past patterns of land use than with present ones in regional landscapes now characterized as natural.”

In other words, much of the wilderness we imagine as pristine reservoirs of biodiversity is in reality the product of human effort.

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2023483118

Ten wpis został zedytowany (2 miesiące temu)

2 użytkowników udostępniło to dalej

Appendix 6: 🚨POLICE!🚨

The institution of police that we have now has only existed for around 200 years, but many people have been conditioned to accept it as a natural and necessary fact of life and have trouble accepting the idea of abolishing the police, even if they strongly support major (dare I say utopian) police reform. Constantly echoing around the Fediverse are debates around questions like "what would you replace police with?" or "what would you do about violent crimes?"

Let's examine the real origins and purposes of police, and the truth about what they actually do and don't do.

Origins of the police - David Whitehouse
"Excellent text examining the creation of the first police forces, which took place in England and the US in just a few decades in the mid-19th century. And explaining that they were not brought into being to prevent crime or protect the public, but primarily to control crowds: the working class, white and black."
https://libcom.org/article/origins-police-david-whitehouse

Police are not primarily crime fighters, according to the data
https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/police-are-not-primarily-crime-fighters-according-data-2022-11-02/

Police Have No Duty to Protect the Public
https://prospect.org/justice/police-have-no-duty-to-protect-the-public/

The Kids The Guns Are For
The same police force that failed Uvalde children is arresting peaceful student protesters at UT Austin. It's not about safety. It's about order.
https://www.momleft.com/p/the-kids-the-guns-are-for

Evidence that curtailing proactive policing can reduce major crime
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-017-0211-5

A little roundup of some of the ways police play a “necessary role” in society. (sarcastically titled thread of links compiled by @HeavenlyPossum)
https://kolektiva.social/@HeavenlyPossum/110809880758838358

The Body Camera: The Language of our Dreams (64 page pdf from the Yale Journal of Law & Liberation)
Did you know that police forces were pushing to implement body cams on their own, before they were pressured to do so by activists for police reform? To understand why, I highly recommend this very well-researched and revealing article by Alec Karakatsanis penetrating the facade of police reform in the specific case of body cams.
Excerpts from the introduction:
Most people would prefer a society with less government surveillance, violence by employees of the state, and waste of public resources. And yet they all keep growing despite decades of “reform.” It is my uncomfortable suggestion in this article that they all keep expanding in part because of these “reforms.” ... By situating the rise of the police body camera within its actual legal, political, and economic contexts, I suggest that the body camera is one of the most important Trojan horses in contemporary U.S. history. ... All of it happened under the guise of making the police bureaucracy more “accountable” and “transparent.”
https://bpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/campuspress.yale.edu/dist/f/4764/files/2024/07/Alec-Karakatsanis_The-Body-Camera-FINAL.pdf

The End of Policing Means the End of Capitalism — Some Likely but Rarely Discussed Economic Effects of Abolition by @AdrianRiskin
https://chez-risk.in/2023/08/24/the-end-of-policing-means-the-end-of-capitalism-some-likely-but-rarely-discussed-economic-effects-of-abolition/

Alternatives to Police
A compilation of case-studies on alternatives to cops. A long bibliography for further reading is also included.
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/rose-city-copwatch-alternatives-to-police

The End of Policing
This book by Alex Vitale falls short of addressing fundamental conditions such as the state, rule of law, and capitalism, and so its proposed solutions are somewhat shallow and flimsy, and despite the title it never quite fully embraces complete abolition of police. Nevertheless it remains a valuable resource as a detailed survey of the vast landscape of death, damage and abuse caused by police (which has only gotten worse since 2017 when this book was published). Notably this book makes its argument against police from a more conventional, non-anarchist context, demonstrating that police abolition is not merely a fringe ideology of extreme radicals but an idea that makes sense even in more mainstream, pragmatic liberal terms.
https://files.libcom.org/files/Vitale%20-%20The%20End%20of%20Policing%20(Police)%20(2017).pdf

The institution of police is closely associated with a belief in Rule Of Law. Here are a couple essays on that important context:

Already shared earlier in this thread, this classic piece "The Conspiracy of Law" by Howard Zinn is also very appropriate here.
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/howard-zinn-the-conspiracy-of-law

Take Your Pick: Law or Freedom
How “Nobody Is above the Law” Abets the Rise of Tyranny
https://crimethinc.com/2018/11/09/take-your-pick-law-or-freedom-how-nobody-is-above-the-law-abets-the-rise-of-tyranny

#police #abolition #ACAB #RuleOfLaw
Ten wpis został zedytowany (3 miesiące temu)

2 użytkowników udostępniło to dalej

New data just released on police use of force:

US police use force on 300,000 people a year, with numbers rising since George Floyd: ‘relentless violence’
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/aug/28/police-use-of-force-violence-data-analysis

Some highlights:

Police in the US use force on at least 300,000 people each year, injuring an estimated 100,000 of them, according to a groundbreaking data analysis on law enforcement encounters.

...despite widespread protests against police brutality following the murder of George Floyd in 2020, overall use of force has remained steady since then – and in many jurisdictions, has increased.

The data builds on past reports that found US police kill roughly 1,200 people each year, or three people a day, a death toll that has crept up every year and dramatically exceeds rates in comparable nations. The nonfatal force statistics and accompanying report illustrate how the killings are just a small fraction of broader police violence and injuries caused by law enforcement.

The group also estimated that along with the 300,000 use-of-force cases each year, there are an additional 200,000 cases in which officers threaten force.

Many people subject to police force are unarmed
Thirty-one agencies disclosed whether people were armed when they faced police force. On average, 83% of people subjected to force across those jurisdictions were unarmed, the agencies reported.

Thirteen agencies disclosed information on what preceded the encounter. In those jurisdictions, fewer than 40% of use-of-force incidents originated with reports of violence or involved a violent crime charge. This mirrors patterns for lethal force, with data suggesting the majority of people killed by police are not accused of violent or serious crimes.

The racial disparities are stark
Black people were subject to overall police use of force at a rate 3.2 times greater than white people in 2022, according to the report. That disparity is more severe than lethal force trends; Black people were killed by police at 2.6 times the rate of white people in 2022.

Limited data also suggests that unhoused people are disproportionately impacted; for the eight agencies that disclosed housing status, 11 to 44% of people subject to force were listed as unhoused.

#police #ACAB

2 użytkowników udostępniło to dalej

Thinking of that person who told me that police oversight is improving because cops are getting charged instead of getting paid time off like they used to (?).
I muted someone like that a couple months ago. Can't remember who. It was incredibly transparent that they were cherry picking and zooming in on data in an effort to avoid talking about systemic reality and gaslight their audience that policing isn't horrific.
The state is violence

RDudostępnił to.

"In Los Angeles, at least, the police exist primarily to harass and abuse unhoused people.

Every other function is tertiary to this primary role. The purpose of a system is what it does.

Police are only necessary for the function of society if you imagine that harassing and abusing unhoused people is necessary for the function of society."

- @HeavenlyPossum

Detailed and comprehensive report from Human Rights Watch, August 2024:

“You Have to Move!”
https://www.hrw.org/report/2024/08/14/you-have-move/cruel-and-ineffective-criminalization-unhoused-people-los-angeles

The Cruel and Ineffective Criminalization of Unhoused People in Los Angeles

"Human Rights Watch analysis of LAPD data from 2016 through 2022 revealed that even though unhoused people account for less than 1 percent of the overall population of the city, 38 percent of all arrests in Los Angeles were of people identified as unhoused, including over 99 percent of all infraction arrests and citations, and over 42 percent of all misdemeanors."

"Criminalization effectively destroys lives and property based on race and economic class. It is a set of policies that prioritizes the needs and values of the wealthy, property owners, and business elites, at the expense of the rights of people living in poverty to an adequate standard of living. As a consequence of historical and present policies and practices that discriminate against Black and other BIPOC people, these groups receive the brunt of criminalization."
Ten wpis został zedytowany (3 miesiące temu)
"Americans are afraid of many threats to their lives – serial killers, crazed gunmen, gang bangers, and above all terrorists – but these threats are surprisingly unlikely. Approximately three-quarters of all homicide victims in America are killed by someone they know. And the real threat from strangers is quite different from what most fear: one-third of all Americans killed by strangers are killed by police."

https://granta.com/violence-in-blue/

2 użytkowników udostępniło to dalej

"The sheep spends its life fearing the wolf only to be eaten by the shepherd."

RDudostępnił to.

Not sure what's more concerning: the number of police homicides or the fact that they're not even reported and need to be estimated.

The problem of police violence is not new. Actually, it is that old that there is even a Latin expression for it: "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?". So everywhere, also in Europe, the "esprit de corps" among the police is an issue. In Europe, however, every lethal interaction must be reported and investigated, making cover-ups at least more difficult.
That's why the rule for over a decade has been "Don't call 911 unless you want someone to get killed."
"Scholars have long debated whether early agropastoralism was intrinsically associated with the “origins of inequality,” seeking the roots of current cultural practices or problems and largely presenting social developments as the byproducts of sedentism and/or crop agriculture. Many now reject any inherent linkage between agriculture and inequality as teleological and materialist, and there is no longer a consensus that either sedentism or food production automatically entails the rise of inequality greater than exists in hunting and gathering societies."

"Our results [exploring the ways in which residents of Neolithic Çatalhöyük in Anatolia differentiated themselves as well as the ways in which they did not] indicate no unified trajectory of inequality through time... and no evidence for institutionalized or lasting economic or social inequality."

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0307067

"Çatalhöyük has strong evidence of an egalitarian society, as no houses with distinctive features (belonging to royalty or religious hierarchy for example) have been found so far. The most recent investigations also reveal little social distinction based on gender, with men and women receiving equivalent nutrition and seeming to have equal social status, as typically found in Paleolithic cultures."

"Noting the lack of hierarchy and economic inequality, historian and anti-capitalist author Murray Bookchin has argued that Çatalhöyük was an early example of anarcho-communism."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%87atalh%C3%B6y%C3%BCk
Scholars are obviously a waste of Grant Money better put to use to pay people to harvest food. @RD4Anarchy
@RD
Because it's just one book by one author. It's a reaction to this: https://www.adamsmith.org/about-adam-smith/, and has been through the discussion mills repeatedly.

This particular author is making a living, possibly more, on the outrage of the moment, your outrage.

Please, dig into philosophy and economics. Let your anger fuel you to learn as much as you can.

I'm NOT saying there's no reason to be outraged. There's plenty, but effectiveness means bringing a gun to a gunfight.
You seem to have missed that this is one post (#26) in a thread of more than 30 toots, and that this post includes two references, not just one, and that these references explore possible answers to one specific question which as I pointed out is a vast subject in itself.

>>Please, dig into philosophy and economics.<<

Please dig into the whole thread, it's full of great references on both.
You're right. I was only late-night responding to the book referenced in the OP. I appreciate the nudge, but moreso your highlighting that people are engaging more deeply.

It's deeply disturbing that what's aguably our primary system isn't working for so very many people, or the planet. That our primary education systems can't escape it makes for chaos. I'm not smithian, but I do think whatever humans do can be assessed as a system, and that we need smarter a one.
Great thread. Thanks for putting this together

@blair_fix
Thanks and you're welcome, it's the least I can do.
Sooooo long ago

read Locke (in depth)

and said:

"this is just bullshit"

but it makes the assholes happy
so you are a suck up asshole pos

@blair_fix @SallyStrange
The State as enemy is a problematic narrative, because then what do you call it when people work together and cooperate? That's not a state? That is why state propaganda actively attacks the state, because if you avoid cooperation for fear of it being oppression, then the organized state can oppress you without anyone else interfering. It's not their business after all!

If you believe that a state is neccessarily an oppressive regime, then you can never form an egalitarian state, leaving you easy pickings for authoritarians.
>>...what do you call it when people work together and cooperate? That's not a state?<<

No, that's not what a state is. Did you read the linked article?
https://www.thecommoner.org.uk/the-state-our-ancient-enemy/

btw, there are a couple other essays that go along with that one:

Coercion: Fundamental to the Modern State
https://www.thecommoner.org.uk/coercion-fundamental-to-the-modern-state/

Ideology: Coercion's Spin Doctor
https://www.thecommoner.org.uk/ideology-coercions-spin-doctor/
I'm saying it's a bait and switch. Your words are being hijacked. Smash the state they say, destroy welfare. The state is making us weak! Destroy our ancient enemy, unions! Those are states! Invading our corporate family! Cripple corporate regulations, get the state out of our business. Free trade! Small state! Small state!

What's that? Stop doubling the size of the police force? Don't be silly. The state is not a state. It's a social contract of mutual benefit, agreed upon by our forefathers. No coercion involved!

See how they can twist your rhetoric? Don't oppose "the state." Oppose the problem. Oppose tyranny, bureaucracy, rent and debt.
>>Oppose tyranny, bureaucracy, rent and debt.<<

Opposing those things puts one in direct opposition to state 🤷‍♂️ I'm not going to beat around the bush about it.

I'm not going to stop using the word capitalism because incoherent ancaps like to misuse the word, ascribing nonsense definitions to it and fantasizing about capitalism without state.

I'm not going to stop explaining to liberals that there is no "social contract", police should be abolished, and our forefathers were patriarchal, genocidal, slave-owning, white supremacist greedy elites pulling this shit out of their asses and writing it down to solidify their power and justify their privilege and all their crimes against humanity.

I suggest you explore further the entire thread which the post you replied to came from, there are tons of empirical references in their to counter any rhetorical attacks.
Opposing your definition of state is a good idea. Very similar things to your states exist though, that people are easily misled to think are bad too, undermining your goals. There are organizations, associations that can oppose things like rent and debt. Movements, even first nations that have made progress to ending colonialism and patriarchy. We can't fight this alone. We have to come together as communities, societies and friends, and show people there are other ways to live. They think your definition of state is the only way things can be, and the articles you provide agree it is the only way, even if they say it must be destroyed. I'm tired of apocalyptic prophecies.
Anarchists are not opposed to organizations, associations, communities, societies, or friends. We oppose hierarchical power structures, not voluntary associations. We are not opposed to organizing.

>>Very similar things to your states exist though, that people are easily misled to think are bad too, undermining your goals.<<

I don't think this is really a thing, or at least not a significant concern. Do you have any examples of this?

Of course if any of these things you're referring to really *are* similar to states (with strict hierarchy, elites, coercion, enclosure, exploitation, control, etc) then they *are* bad things.
I'm referring to things like the post office, which has been stripped of funding because "state bad," and all that accomplished was us paying scummy delivery companies more to do the same thing.
The neoliberals who have starved public services of funds are not anti-state. They’re very much in favor of state violence that serves capital.
Exactly. This was about their vision of state, not a result of any anti-state movement.

Also, the post office is not anything remotely similar to a state. Those who gutted it weren't trying to eliminate a state-like structure, they just want that structure to be privatized.
Reminds me of Graeber’s point about abolishing the state and seeing what remains—what aspects of it people would truly want to sustain if free to choose. He suggested the NHS but the USPS is another good example of the sort of institution I could readily imagine free people running for themselves.
This example also comes to mind:

China's ancient water pipe networks show they were a communal effort with no evidence of a centralized state authority
https://phys.org/news/2023-08-china-ancient-pipe-networks-communal.html
Yeah, voluntary human cooperation (I can’t believe I have to say this) predates the state by, you know, 300,000 years or so.
In theory free people do run it. There are just other people trying to stop those people and prevent it from being run freely. That's why I oppose tyranny, to have it where free people run things for each other. By the people, for the people, etc.
No, in *pretense* free people run it, but in reality it is an arm of state bureaucracy and product of state violence.

Free people *could* run it, sure.
that is what the bureaucracy claims, at least. They love appropriating nice things and telling us that that thing is their arm, and their product. I don't believe they are the post office though, or the library. They just want us to think they are.
Right, and we don’t have to take their claims at face value.

There are many services the state has co-opted, but that doesn’t mean they’re somehow integral to the state. We could get rid of the state and still cooperate to send each other letters in the mail.

The sort of rhetoric you’ve expressed concern about is hardly anti-state. Right-wing discourse is often deeply hostile to the idea of the state doing anything that could empower the weak, but that’s not the same as being *anti-state.* Someone like Trump might want to defund the USPS for his own purposes and use rhetoric about small government and low taxes, but he’s not about to abolish, say, the cops—an institution that’s actually integral to the state.
The state is not a synonym for “when people work together and cooperate.” If that’s how you’re using it, then I assure you that you’re referring to something other than what anarchists are referring to when they use that term.
I just don't want to have to read Kropotkin to understand that means "Community investigators good, police bad."
That’s fine! But it’s silly to accuse an anarchist of opposing cooperation or being vulnerable to manipulation by authority because they’re using a term differently than you are.
Ha if I was accusing them of that, I'd declare they were only pretending to be anarchist, and were deliberately using upsetting and unactionable language to aid authoritarians, by making us act like big angry babies demanding incoherent extremes, and not helping each other. But I'm sure they're just frustrated by some craven centrists trying to get us to shake hands with Nazis again.
What are you talking about
It's late 1980s, the last villages in Thailand are being visited by armed men who tell them to move to their new numbered houses on a grid pattern. Only the men are given title deeds. The new headman, ex-military, gets the best newly-privatised land. The villagers are told that from today you will pay taxes and let me introduce the money lenders and the sellers of seed, pesticides, herbicides. If you can't settle your debts, migrate to a Bangkok slum ...
@guncelawits I feel like the only things that should be extracted are bad teeth (speaking as someone at the front lines of the STR extractive economy, with STRs at three of four corners of my house lot).
If you think the info in this thread is important and want to share it with people IRL, here is a flier you can print to post or otherwise make available offline.
Flier for sharing the thread of threads "How Did We Get Here?".
Text of flier:
How did we get here?
Here = climate crisis and environmental catastrophes; a world of inequality, exploitation and oppression; genocide and war; hunger and starvation; a world of fences, walls, gatekeepers, prisons, police, bullsh*t jobs, artificial scarcity and criminalized poverty; a world overrun with cars and preventable disease; a world of vanishing biodiversity and blooming fascism; a world where "democracy" results in being led by some of the worst of humanity;
a world ruled by an imaginary but all-powerful and single-minded god: Capital.

Visit this social media thread (on Mastodon) for research and perspectives from historians, anthropologists, archaeologists, political philosophers, economists, and more:
https://c.im/@whathappened/113427830249968598
[QR code of URL]

HeavenlyPossumudostępnił to.

Submitted anonymously, posted at a bus stop (location undisclosed).
Photo of flier posted taped to a clear surface.
Text of flier:
How did we get here?
Here = climate crisis and environmental catastrophes; a world of inequality, exploitation and oppression; genocide and war; hunger and starvation; a world of fences, walls, gatekeepers, prisons, police, bullsh*t jobs, artificial scarcity and criminalized poverty; a world overrun with cars and preventable disease; a world of vanishing biodiversity and blooming fascism; a world where "democracy" results in being led by some of the worst of humanity;
a world ruled by an imaginary but all-powerful and single-minded god: Capital.

Visit this social media thread (on Mastodon) for research and perspectives from historians, anthropologists, archaeologists, political philosophers, economists, and more:
https://c.im/@whathappened/113427830249968598
[QR code of URL]