#agriculture market reforms

[farmerstrend]

Ways to Help Tea Farmers for Sustainable Tea Farming in Kenya

Explore the challenges and opportunities in Kenya’s tea industry as smallholder tea farmers face rising costs, corruption, and the need for sustainable practices. Discover how government support can revitalize this vital sector. Kenya’s tea industry is a key player in the global market, but smallholder farmers are struggling. Learn about the impact of rising costs, corruption, and the potential…

[apas-95]

Is there a story behind China's one child policy that makes it not as horrifying as western media claims?

The defining feature of China's development for the past 70 years has been the urban-rural divide. In order to develop a semi-feudal country with a very low industrial level into an industrialised, socialist nation, it was necessary to develop industrial centres. To 'organically' develop industrial centres would have taken many decades, if not centuries of continued impoverishment and starvation, so programs were put in place to accelerate the development of industry by preferentially supporting cities.

Programs like the 'urban-rural price scissors' placed price controls on agricultural products, which made food affordable for city-dwellers, at the direct expense of reducing the income of rural, agricultural areas. This hits on the heart of the issue - to preferentially develop industrial centres in order to support the rest of the country, the rest of the country must first take up the burden of supporting those centres. Either some get out of poverty *first*, or nobody gets out of poverty at all. The result being: a divide between urban and rural areas in their quality of life and prospects. In order to keep this system from falling apart, several other policies were needed to support it, such as the Hukou system, which controlled immigration within the country. The Hukou system differentiated between rural and urban residents, and restricted immigration to urban areas - because, given the urban-rural divide, everyone would rather just try to move to the cities, leaving the agricultural industry to collapse. The Hukou system (alongside being a piece in many other problems, like the 'one country two systems', etc) prevented this, and prevented the entire thing from collapsing. The 'one child policy' was another system supporting this mode of development. It applied principally to city-dwellers, to prevent the populations of cities expanding beyond the limited size the agricultural regions could support, and generally had no 'punishments' greater than a lack of government child-support, or even a fine, for those who still wanted additional children. Ethnic minorities, and rural residents, were granted additional children, with rural ethnic minorities getting double. It wasn't something anyone would love, but it served an important purpose.

I use the past-tense, here, because these systems have either already been phased out or are in the process of being phased out. The method of urban-rural price scissors as a method of development ran its course, and, ultimately, was exhausted - the negative aspects, of its underdevelopment of rural regions, began to overwhelm its positive aspects. So, it was replaced with the paradigm of 'Reform and Opening Up' around the 1980s. Urban-rural price scissors were removed (leading to protests by urban workers and intellectuals in the late '80s), and the Hukou system, along with the 'one child policy', were and are being slowly eased out as lessening inequality between the urban and rural areas make them unnecessary. Under the new system, the driver of development was no longer at the expense of rural regions, but was carried out through the internal market and external capital. The development paradigm of Reform and Opening Up worked to resolved some contradictions, in the form of the urban-rural divide, and created some of its own, in the form of internal wealth divisions within the cities. Through it, over 800 million people were lifted out of extreme poverty - almost all of them being in rural areas - and extreme poverty was completely abolished within China. 'Extreme poverty' can be a difficult thing for westerners to grasp, wherein poverty means not paying rent on time, but to illustrate - many of the last holdout regions of extreme poverty were originally guerrilla base areas, impassable regions of mountainside which were long hikes away from schools or hospitals, wherein entire villages were living in conditions not dissimilar to their feudal state a century before. These villages were, when possible, given infrastructure and a meaningful local industry accounting their environment and tradition (like growing a certain type of mountainous fruit), or entirely relocated to free government-built housing lower down the mountain that was theirs to own. These were the people the 'one child policy' was aiding, by reducing the urban population they had to support. Again, there were exemptions for rural and ethnic minority populations to the policy.

Even now, Reform and Opening Up is running its course. Its own negative aspects, such as urban wealth inequality, are beginning to overcome its positive aspects. So, the new paradigm is 'Common Prosperity', which will work to resolve the past system's contradictions, and surely introduce its own contradictions in the form of chafing against the national bourgeoisie, as it increases state control and ownership of industry, and furthers a reintroduced collectivisation. Organising a nation of well over a billion people is not simple. It is not done based on soundbytes and on picking apart policies in the abstract for how 'dystopian' they sound. It is an exceedingly complex and interconnected process based on a dialectical, material analysis of things; not a utopian, idealist one. What matters is this: those 800,000,000 people now freed from absolute poverty. The things necessary to achieve that were, unquestionably, good things - because they achieved that. They had their negative aspects, as does everything that exists, but they were unquestionably correct and progressive things.

[reddest-flower]

Cuba broke through its colonial domination into freedom. From the mountains of the Sierra Maestra and from the cities came the torrential power of the people against the US-backed dictator Fulgencio Batista. ‘The revolution is made in the midst of danger’, said Fidel Castro as he led his band of peasant-soldiers from the hills into the cities. They had triumphed against remarkable odds. Quickly, the revolutionaries passed a series of decrees – just as the Soviets had – to draw the key classes to their side. To draw in the urban Cubans, the revolutionaries cut rents by half – sending a strong signal to the bourgeoisie that they had a different class outlook. Then, the revolutionaries took on the United States, whose government held a monopoly over services to the island. Telephone and electrical companies – all American – were told to reduce their rates immediately. Then, on May 17, 1959, the Cuban government passed its agrarian reform – the keystone of the revolutionary process. Land holdings would be restricted so that no large landowners could dominate the landscape and so that the US sugar industry could not strangle the hopes of the island. The most radical part of the reform was not the land ceiling itself, but the logic that agrarian reform would transform the stagnation of the Cuban economy and its dependence upon the United States. The law clearly stated that, from a socialist standpoint,

«The agrarian reform has two principal objectives: (a) to facilitate the planting or the extension of new crops with the view of furnishing raw materials to industry, satisfying the food requirements of the nation, increasing the export of agricultural products and, reciprocally, the import of foreign products which are essential to use; (b) to develop the interior market (family, domestic) by raising the purchasing power of the rural population. In other words, increase the national demand in order to develop the industries atrophied by an overly restrained consumption, or in order to create those which, for lack of customers, were never able to get started among us.»

The revolutionaries wanted to diversify their sugarcane island, produce food security for their people, remove people from desperation, increase the ability of people to consume a range of goods and engineer a people-centred rather than an export-centred economy. Long before Castro announced his commitment to communism, the regime had already developed a carefully thought out socialist platform.

The United States of America, having overthrown the radical nationalist government in Guatemala in 1954, was eager to repeat the task in Cuba in 1959. An embargo came swiftly, as did every form of humiliation possible against the Cuban people. The Cuban economy was structured around dependency to Washington, with the sugar bought by the US firms and with the island turned into a playground for American tourists. Now, the US decided to squeeze this little island, only ninety miles from the US shoreline. Gunboats were readied, a failed invasion tried in April 1961 at the Bay of Pigs. Cuba was vulnerable but also protected by the deep roots of its revolution. But would this protection be sufficient? Could Cuba, alone, be able to survive the onslaught from the United States?

On February 5, 1960, a leader in the USSR and an Old Bolshevik – Anastas Mikoyan – came to Havana to join Fidel Castro at the opening of a Soviet scientific, cultural and technical exhibition. A week later, Mikoyan and Castro signed an agreement for the USSR to buy Cuban sugar at the world market price (in dollars) and provide credits for the Cubans to buy Russian goods. The USSR would subsequently buy almost all the Cuban sugar harvest, even as the Russian consumer market could very well have been supplied by beet sugar from within the USSR. Prices fluctuated, but, on balance, the Cubans were able to find a regular buyer to take over from the United States. The Russians also provided over a $100 million in credits toward the construction of Cuba’s chemical industry as well as trained Cuban technical and scientific workers in the USSR. Diversification of Cuba’s economy remained on the cards, although it became clear that it would not be an easy task. In August 1963, Castro announced that diversification, as well as industrialization, would be postponed. Cuba needed to concentrate on its sugarcane harvest to earn the means to survive the embargo.

On February 24, 1965, Che Guevara addressed the Second Economic Seminar of Afro-Asian Solidarity in Algiers, Algeria. He had come to talk about the economic problems for a revolution in a post-colonial country. Overthrowing the former colonizer was not enough, Che said, since ‘a real break’ is needed from imperialism for the new state to actually flourish and not remain in dependency. How could the post-colonial state survive a hostile economic climate? Who would buy its goods – mainly primary, unprocessed goods – at a fair price, and who would lend it capital at fair terms to develop? Capitalist banks and countries would not provide the post-colonial state, particularly a socialist state, with the means to break out of the trap of underdevelopment. Banks would lend money to a post-colonial state at rates higher than it would lend to a colonial power. Expensive money would only put the post-colonial state into further difficulty, as it would find it hard to service its debt and see its debt multiply out of hand. To prevent this situation, Che argued, the ‘socialist countries must help pay for the development of countries now starting out on the road to liberation’. Trade between socialist countries must not take place based on the law of value of capitalism, but through the creation of fraternal prices. ‘The real task’, Che said, ‘consists of setting prices that will permit development. A great shift in ideas will be involved in changing the order of international relations. Foreign trade should not determine policy, but should, on the contrary, be subordinated to a fraternal policy toward the peoples.’

China, in 1960, offered Cuba credit of $60 million without interest and without a timeline for repayment. This was an enviable loan. But the scale was much smaller than the Soviet assistance. By 1964, the USSR had provided Cuba with economic assistance valued at over $600 million, while the Eastern European countries offered several hundred million more in aid and assistance. The USSR had also trained over 3,000 Cubans in agronomy and agricultural mechanization as well as 900 Cubans as engineers and technicians. Che recognized the value of the Soviet ‘fraternal policy’ both in terms of the training and in the prices offered. ‘Clearly, we could not ask the Socialist world to buy this quantity of sugar at this price based on economic motives’, he had said in 1961, ‘because really there is no reason in world commerce for this purchase and it was simply a political gesture’.

Red Star Over the Third World, Vijay Prashad, 2019

[kleopatra45]

Greetings, I had request if you can post careers related to the 10th house/MC from both western and vedic perspective... Thanking you

Careers Related to the 10th House/MC: Western and Vedic Perspectives

The 10th house, often associated with the Midheaven (MC), is a pivotal house in astrology that governs career, public reputation, achievements, and how we strive for success. Both Western and Vedic astrology provide rich insights into the career potential through the analysis of this house, though they approach the interpretation differently.

Western Astrology:

In Western astrology, the 10th house and the Midheaven (MC) reveal the nature of one's career, public image, and long-term aspirations. The sign on the MC, the ruling planet of the MC, and any planets in the 10th house shape the direction of one’s professional life. Below is a breakdown of possible career paths based on the sign on the MC and the planets associated with the 10th house.

Aries MC: Individuals with Aries on the MC are natural leaders, driven by ambition and a pioneering spirit. They thrive in careers that allow them to take charge and lead, such as entrepreneurship, military roles, sports, or any field where quick decision-making and initiative are valued.

Taurus MC: Taurus on the MC suggests a career focused on stability, security, and material success. These individuals are drawn to professions in finance, real estate, agriculture, luxury goods, and any field where their practical nature and aesthetic sensibilities can shine.

Gemini MC: With Gemini on the MC, communication is key. These individuals excel in roles that involve writing, teaching, media, journalism, marketing, or any job that requires adaptability, networking, and intellectual engagement.

Cancer MC: Cancer on the MC often indicates a nurturing career path. These individuals may be drawn to professions related to caregiving, such as nursing, childcare, social work, or real estate, hospitality, and any job where creating a sense of home or emotional security is important.

Leo MC: Leo on the MC is associated with a desire for recognition and creative expression. Careers in entertainment, acting, politics, fashion, and leadership roles are common. These individuals often seek careers where they can stand out, inspire others, and express their creative talents.

Virgo MC: Virgo on the MC points to a meticulous and service-oriented approach to work. These individuals may excel in healthcare, research, editing, service industries, and any career that requires attention to detail, organization, and a focus on improving systems.

Libra MC: Libra on the MC is linked to careers involving beauty, harmony, and relationships. These individuals might be drawn to law, diplomacy, fashion, art, counseling, or any role that involves balancing opposing forces, aesthetics, or creating harmony in social settings.

Scorpio MC: Scorpio on the MC suggests a career involving intensity, transformation, and depth. These individuals may pursue careers in psychology, research, finance, detective work, or any field where they can explore the unknown, deal with crises, or engage in transformative work.

Sagittarius MC: Sagittarius on the MC is associated with careers that involve exploration, education, and the pursuit of knowledge. These individuals may find fulfillment in teaching, travel-related jobs, publishing, philosophy, or any field that allows them to broaden their horizons and share wisdom.

Capricorn MC: Capricorn on the MC is linked to ambition, structure, and long-term goals. These individuals are often drawn to careers in government, management, business, engineering, or any field where discipline, responsibility, and strategic planning are required.

Aquarius MC: Aquarius on the MC indicates a career path that involves innovation, humanitarian work, and social reform. These individuals may excel in technology, science, social causes, or any field where they can contribute to progressive change and work towards a better future for society.

Pisces MC: Pisces on the MC is associated with creativity, compassion, and spirituality. These individuals may be drawn to careers in the arts, healing, spirituality, film, photography, or any field where they can express their imagination and connect with the emotional or spiritual dimensions of life.

Vedic Astrology:

In Vedic astrology, the 10th house, also known as Karma Bhava, represents career, professional success, and one's contributions to society. The planet ruling the 10th house, the condition of Saturn (the natural significator of career), and the placement of planets in the 10th house are crucial in determining one's career path.

Sun in the 10th House: The Sun in the 10th house signifies leadership and authority. Individuals with this placement may pursue careers in government, politics, administration, or any role where they can be in charge. They are often seen in positions of power and influence, where their leadership qualities are recognized.

Moon in the 10th House: The Moon in the 10th house brings a nurturing and emotionally responsive approach to one's career. Individuals with this placement may excel in public relations, hospitality, healthcare, real estate, or any field that involves caring for others and creating a supportive environment. Their careers often involve a connection to the public or dealing with the needs of others.

Mars in the 10th House: Mars in the 10th house indicates a dynamic and action-oriented career. These individuals are likely to be drawn to careers in the military, engineering, sports, law enforcement, or any field that requires courage, determination, and physical energy. They excel in competitive environments and are often seen in roles that involve taking decisive action.

Mercury in the 10th House: Mercury in the 10th house signifies a career involving communication, intellect, and business acumen. Individuals with this placement may excel in writing, teaching, journalism, trade, commerce, or any profession that requires intellectual skills, adaptability, and the ability to convey information effectively.

Jupiter in the 10th House: Jupiter in the 10th house indicates a career in teaching, counseling, law, or finance. These individuals are often drawn to roles that involve guiding others, sharing knowledge, and upholding ethical principles. They may find success in academic fields, religious institutions, or any profession where wisdom and morality are valued.

Venus in the 10th House: Venus in the 10th house suggests a career in the arts, entertainment, fashion, or luxury goods. These individuals are often drawn to professions where beauty, aesthetics, and creativity play a central role. They may also find success in diplomacy, public relations, or any field that requires charm, social skills, and a sense of harmony.

Saturn in the 10th House: Saturn in the 10th house indicates a disciplined and structured approach to one's career. These individuals may pursue careers in politics, engineering, construction, or labor-related jobs. They are often seen in roles that require responsibility, hard work, and long-term commitment. Saturn's influence may also lead to careers involving law, administration, or any field where persistence and patience are key.

Rahu in the 10th House: Rahu in the 10th house signifies unconventional and innovative career paths. These individuals may be drawn to careers in media, technology, foreign jobs, or any field that involves breaking new ground and challenging societal norms. They may also find success in professions that deal with mystery, research, or hidden knowledge.

Ketu in the 10th House: Ketu in the 10th house indicates a career focused on spiritual pursuits, research, or the occult. These individuals may be drawn to roles that involve detachment from material success, such as in astrology, spiritual counseling, or any field where inner wisdom and insight are valued over external recognition. Ketu's influence may also lead to careers in fields that require a deep understanding of the metaphysical or esoteric.

Additionally, the D10 chart (Dasamsa) is used for a deeper analysis of career prospects.

I hope this helps! ♥️

©️kleopatra45

[probablyasocialecologist]

If Ugandans have a social safety net, it is woven from banana fibers, and if there is a clear path to socialism, it will be lined with banana leaves. The lusuku model, premised on intercropping and smallholder farming, could be the basis for national agrarian reform that improves the lives of Uganda’s agricultural workers without accelerating the destruction of the natural environment. Uganda faces increasing difficulty feeding itself because of climate extremes and land degradation, and this affects farmers more significantly than anyone else. Moreover, since the 1990s, the ruling National Resistance Movement regime sold off and dismantled most of the coffee, tea, and cotton growers cooperatives, leaving smallholder farmers in the hands of the predatory middlemen which cooperatives had been established to protect them against. Unable to collectively bargain and exposed to dramatic fluctuations in the market prices for cash crops, many people left rural areas to search for employment in cities. This has been a driving force behind the massive inequality between rural and urban workers. Ugandans now produce more food than they consume, even exporting to other countries in the region, yet 41% of people are undernourished, and agricultural production has decreased over the last 20 years. For the most part, the strategy pursued by Uganda’s government has been to encourage the development of ecologically disastrous intensive agriculture for export, privileging foreign investors rather than developing the infrastructure that would benefit peasants. Indeed, while more than 70% of Ugandans are employed in agriculture, the sector only receives around 4% of public investment, and projects aimed at helping smallholder farmers have had very little success, even by their own standards. Many of the government’s investments in agriculture very clearly advantage larger landowners, to the detriment of the poorest farmers. For example, most of the government’s investment in labor-saving technologies has been spent on tractors, which are great for large plots but largely unaffordable or unsuitable for the average farmer, whose plot is usually between 1-3 acres large. However, a socialist transition premised on agroecological reforms could make use of the existing lusuku model to create the kind of growth that actually improves poor farmers’ lives without destroying their environment. This could begin with reestablishing cooperatives and engineering agricultural prices around social needs and goals, like guaranteeing access to food. Research from around the world has shown that while large, monocrop plantations are good at producing huge volumes of one crop, smallholder farms are more productive when evaluated on a per-unit area and are capable of securing national food sovereignty. Why, for example, should Ugandans buy rice imported from Pakistan or Vietnam when banana intercropping yields more calories per hectare than rice? Lusukus could feed the nation without relying on foreign experts, development aid, or the capital-intensive inputs now being imported to grow for export. Because lusukus are far better for the soil, they also improve the nation’s capacity to resist severe floods and drought, effects of climate change that hit poor farmers hardest. In these ways, the lusuku model could provide a sustainable path to socialist development.

[lovehael]

Foreign Aid as a Weapon

Most U.S. aid commits the recipient nation to buy U.S. goods at U.S. prices, to be transported in U.S. ships. In keeping with its commitment to capitalism, the U.S. government does not grant assistance to state-owned enterprises in Third World nations, only to the private sector. Most foreign aid never reaches the needy segments of recipient nations. Much of it is used to subsidize U.S. corporate investment and a substantial amount finds its way into the coffers of corrupt comprador rulers. Some of it subsidizes the cash-crop exports of agribusinesses at the expense of small farmers who grow food for local markets.

The net result of foreign aid, as with most overseas investment, is a greater concentration of wealth for the few and deeper poverty for the many. A large sum of money cannot be injected into a class society in a class-neutral way. It goes either to the rich or the poor, in most cases, the rich.

Aid is also a powerful means of political control. It is withheld when poorer nations dare to effect genuine reforms that might tamper with the distribution of wealth and power. Thus in 1970 when the democratically elected Allende government in Chile initiated reforms that benefited the working class and encroached upon the privileges of wealthy investors, all U.S. aid was cut off- except assistance to the Chilean military, which was increased. In some instances, aid is used deliberately to debilitate local production, as when Washington dumped sorghum and frozen chickens onto the Nicaraguan market to undercut cooperative farms and undermine land reform, or when it sent corn to Somalia to undercut local production and cripple independent village economies. It should be remembered that these corporate agricultural exports are themselves heavily subsidized by the U.S. government.

A key instrument of class-biased aid is the World Bank, an interlocking, international consortium of bankers and economists who spend billions of dollars- much of it from U.S taxpayers- to finance projects that shore up repressive right-wing regimes and subsidize corporate investors at the expense of the poor and the environment. For instance, in the 1980s the World Bank built a highway into northwest Brazil's rain forests, then leveled millions of acres so that wealthy Brazilian ranchers could enjoy cheap grazing lands. Brazil also sent some of its urban poor down that highway to settle the land and further deplete it. Within ten years, the region was denuded and riddled with disease and poverty. As Jim Hightower put it: "All the world's bank robbers combined have not done one-tenth of one percent of the harm that the World Bank has in just fifty years."

Against Empire by Michael Parenti

[inqilabi]

I think people misunderstand marxism / communism and I don't blame them. In the dominant public perception it's just a mix of vague leftist principles. And I do think that the ruling class did a great job at blurring the lines between actual Marxism and what is their own ideology - liberalism, through academia and involvement in "revolutionary politics" themselves. Yes the ruling class was very much involved in civil rights movement and onwards. The woke capitalist politics you see today are not a co-optation. It is the ideology of the bourgeoisie. The bourgeois is very much "revolutionary" in their optics.

So the writers strike of Hollywood eg. People think that this is what a leftist revolutionary strike looks like. No. Hollywood is an arm of empire. So from a Marxist pov these are petty bourgeois or labor aristocracy (the folks who benefit from imperialism) fighting for top dollar wages (which itself extracted from imperialism ie dollar hegemony).

In the north america, marxism would look like reinvestment in production. Since imperialism resulted in deindustrialization. Hence the entire economies of US and Canada are service based. Not based in productive output. So this means investment in agriculture, industry, infrastructure. Labor. This is usually your American that is not urban. It's the rural folks doing productive labor. These are the people when they strike will strike fear. Like the UPS strike.

Also tax the rich is a useless phrase. Taxing the rich wouldn't do anything. That's just even more powerful ruling class families making a couple of multi-millionares into a scapegoat for public placation. China has billionaires ever since market reforms but they answer to and are beholdened to the party. Taxing isn't the answer. It's a total overhaul of production and who owns they production.

[racefortheironthrone]

In a world where Robb Stark wins his war and manages to consolidate his realm, with the 7K being no more, lets assume he also annexes the northern crownlands too, what kind of council or burocracy would he establish to govern and how much of your economic development plans could he reasonably carry out in his lifetime and how could he unify his 2 realms economy into a cohesive unit?

In a Stark victory scenario, I think annexing the northern Crownlands would be an overstretch and something of a distraction from more important tasks (like bringing the Iron Islands and the Vale into his sphere of influence so that he can govern a geographically, economically, and politically coherent kingdom/coalition of northern Westeros).

To quote King Robb:

"Duskendale, on the narrow sea? Why would they go to Duskendale?" He'd shook his head, bewildered. "A third of my foot, lost for Duskendale?"

What matters in a brand-new Kingdom of the North is things like whether Gulltown accepts silver coins minted in White Harbor with Robb's face on them as valid payment for debts and taxes, or whether the Ironborn agree to keep their reaving south of Ironman's Bay, or whether the Stark navy can keep the Trident open all the way to the Bay of Crabs so that the Riverlands can keep trading directly with Braavos.

I did some back-reading through various economic development posts to see what I'd said in the past about the tricky scenario of how one balances the interests of multiple kingdoms in pursuing economic development. One of the things I'm noticing is that there are some reforms where there is real issues with competition/duplication of efforts (a Kingdom of the North can probably only support one Bank, one canal scheme, one sub-treasury system, one purchasing/marketing cooperative, etc.), some reforms where individual kingdoms can pursue their own goals but where there would be an issue about how the king balances the rewards he's doling out between the kingdoms (do you put your marginal dragon into winter schools and greenhouses for the North or church schools for the Riverlands or roads for the Vale?), and some where every kingdom can pitch in in a common effort (if there's going to be one sub-treasury plan, you're going to need a network of granaries along waterways from the Last River down to the Trident, the same information about how to improve agricultural productivity can be shared between the North, the Riverlands, and the Vale basically for free, etc).

That being said, one of the major political challenges of the Kingdom of the North was always going to be how you balance the interests of the component kingdoms and make everyone feel like the central government is giving them a fair deal and being attentive to their interests - and as you say, forging them into a cohesive economy would go a long way into doing that. So for example, one priority should be in working out reciprocity in trade between the newly-chartered cities. It certainly helps that a bunch of them (White Harbor, Gulltown, Maidenpool, Lord Harroway's Town, Saltpans) are along the same coast of the Narrow Sea or just upriver from the Narrow Sea, which makes close trade links more likely. However, you're going to want to make formal legal arrangements that, when it comes to port fees and staple fees and warehousing fees and the like, all of the North's cities agree to set them as low as possible for other Northern cities (if not an outright zollverein), and that burgher rights are transferrable between cities and that city ordinances will be honored by other cities, and so on.

In terms of "council or burocracy would he establish to govern," Robb was already taking a decent first step to bolster Lord Paramount Edmure Tully by appointing Brynden the Blackfish as Warden of the Southern Marches.

As I've written before, issuing city charters would be a crucial element of governing the Riverlands effectively. Giving Maidenpool, Lord Harroway's Town, Stoney Sept, Fairmarket, and Seagard a combination of economic and political self-governance would paradoxically allow King Robb to project royal authority more effectively - especially when it comes to generating revenue and manpower and enforcement of economic regulations.

[sourcreammachine]

GREEN PARTY MANIFESTO 2024 SUMMARY

tldr: there's a feeling of tension in this manifesto, between youthful zennial climatic ecosocialism and old-guard hippy-liberal environmentalism. this year the greens may well go from 1 MP to the dizzying heights of 2 (there's whispers on the wind that they may even get 3...), and the green council delegation is at 800-odd now, so this could easily be a changing-of-the-guard moment

with the great Berry and the ok Denyer in parliament the party could have more momentum in battling the starmerite government, and with that, it has the ability, the possibility to pick up more momentum. this is a big opportunity in the party's history - over the next five years it can and could be pushed into a holistic ecosocialist movement by the centrally influential mass party membership, and remove the last dregs of its tunnel vision to provide a lefty movement for everyone, green and pink, a Newfoundland coalition. with votes at 16 on the cards and this potential evolution of the party, 2029 could be a big moment for this country's left. whether or not the greens play the role of keystone is up to them

it is also the only manifesto to use the term 'neurodivergent'

💷ECONOMY

wealth tax of 1% on individuals with assets over §10m and 2% for assets over §1b (an extremely humble proposal), reform capital gains and investment dividend taxation to be at the same rates as income taxation, remove the income-based bands on national insurance contributions, ie raising total income taxation by 8% at §50k/a, – altogether raising government revenues by upwards of §70b/a

stratify VAT to reduce it for consumer stuff and hike it for stuff like financial services

permanent windfall tax on banks for whenever they get windfalls

perform a holistic land survey to get the data needed for a new, effective Land Tax

abolish the tax relief on existing freeports and SEZs

heavy carbon tax to raise a boatload of billions, rising progressively over a decade to allow industrial adaptation, for a ~§80b state windfall for five years that'll be for green investment as this windfall starts to recede

renationalise water and energy

§15 minimum wage, 10:1 pay ratio for all organisations public and private (ie §150 sort-of maximum wage, ~§300k/a), mandatory equal pay audits, 'support' lower hours and four-day weeks [clarification needed]

unambiguously define gig workers as workers with contract rights from day one, repeat offenders of gig-slavery will be banned from operating in the country

every City bank required to produce a strategy with a clear pathway to divestment of all fossil fuels "as soon as possible and at least by 2030", every City non-banking organisation simply to be banned from having fossil fuel in their portfolios, credit to be banned for repeat City climate offenders, mandate the BoE to fulfil the funding of the climate transition and climate leadership of the City, FCA to develop measures to ban fossil fuel share trading in the City and immediately prohibit all new shares in fossil fuels

"we will explore legal ways for companies to be transformed into mutual organisations"😈

develop regional cooperative banks to invest in regional SMEs, coops and community enterprises

diversify crop growth, promote local agricultural cooperatives and peripheral urban horticultural farms, give farmers a sort of collective bargain against grocers

aim towards a circular economy: require ten-year warranties on white goods, rollout of right-to-repair

tighten monopoly laws on media with a hard cap preventing >20% of a media market being owned by one individual or company and implement Leveson 2

🏥PUBLIC SERVICES

abolish tuition fees and cancel standing debt

surge nhs funding by §30B, triple labour's spending plans for everything, the entire budget, the entire state, everything

free personal care, with occupational therapy being part of this

35h/w free child care (eg seven hours over five days, or seven days of five hours)

renationalise many academies under local authorities, abolish the "charity" status of private schools and charge VAT

surge funding for smoking-cessation, addiction support and sexual health service

surge funding for public dentistry with free care for children and low-earners

free school breakfasts in primary school and free school lunches for all schools

one-month guarantee of access to mental health therapies

online access to PrEP

let school playing fields be used in the evenings by local sports clubs

greater funding for civic sports facilities and pools

🏠HOUSING

unambiguously-under-the-law nationalise the crown estate for an absolute fuckton of land and assets for housing and for green energy and rewilding for FREE

rent control for local authorities, ban no-fault evictions and introduce long-term leases, create private tenancy boards of tenants

local authorities to have right of first refusal on the purchase of certain properties at aggressive rates, such as unoccupied or uninsulated buildings

all new homes to be Passivhaus standard with mandatory solar panels and heat pumps

§30B across five years to insulate homes, §12B of which is for social homes, and §9B more for heat pumps, and §7B more for summer cooling

planning law reform: council planning mechanisms to priorities little developments all over the place rather than sprawling blobs, demolitions to require as thorough a planning application as erections, new developments required to not be car dependent

planning laws to require large-scale developments feature access to key community infrastructures such as transport, health and education, often mandating the construction of new key infrastructures, support nightlife and local culture in planning regulations

exempt pubs and local cultural events from VAT

building materials to be reusable, builders' waste rates to be surged to encourage use of reuse

750k new social homes in five years

🚄TRANSPORT

'a bus service to every village', restore local authority control and/or ownership of their busses

renationalise rail via franchise-concession lapsing, slowly assume ownership of the rolling stock (currently leased, and would continue to be so under labour's implementation of renationalisation) by buying a new train when the stock needs to be replaced

electrification agenda across the rail network, strategic approach to rail line and station reopenings

bring forward (sorta, the tories suspended it but labour says they'll reinstate it) the new petrol car ban from 2030 to 2027, existing petrol cars targeted to be off the road by 2034, investigate road-price charges as a replacement for petrol tax, hike road tax proportionally to vehicle weight, drop urban speed limits from 50kph to 30kph (or from 30mph to 20mph if you only speak Wrong), mass funding for freightrail and support logistics firms transitioning away from lorries

§2.5b/a for footpaths and cycleways, target of 50% of urban journeys to be extravehicular by 2030

frequent-flyer levy, ban on domestic flights within three-hour rail distance, remove the exemption of airline fuel from fuel tax, prioritise training of airline workers into other transportational jobs

👮FORCE

abolish the home office, transfer its police/security portfolio to the justice ministry and its citizenship/migration portfolio to a new migration ministry separate from the criminal justice system

abolish the kill the bill bill and restore the right to protest

recognise palestine, push for immediate ceasefire and prosecution of war crimes, back the south africa case, "[support] an urgent international effort to end the illegal occupation of palestinian land"

grant asylum-seekers the right to work before their application is granted

end the hostile environment

abolish Prevent

end routine stop-and-search and facial recognition

commission to reform 'counterproductive' drug regime, decriminalise personal possession

amend the Online Safety Act to "[protect] political debate from being manipulated by falsehoods, fakes and half-truths", ie actually protecting 'fReE sPeEcH' and not everything that rightists imply by that phrase

decriminalise sex work

reform laws to give artists IP protections against ai

cancel trident and disarm

push for nato reforms (in its and our interest, they're not russophiles, they're not galloway, it's ok): get it to adopt a no-first-use nuclear policy, get it to prioritise diplomatic action first rather than military reaction, get it to adopt a stronger line on only acting for the defence of its member states

right to roam🚶‍♂️

🌱CLIMATE

zero-carbon by 2040, rather than the ephemeral ostensible government target of 2050

stop all new oil/gas licenses, end all subsidy for oil/gas industries, regulate biofuels to end greenwashing, end subsidies for biomass

decarbonise energy by 2030, minimum threshold of energy infrastructures to be community owned, "end the de facto ban on onshore wind" with planning reform

massively expand the connections between the insular grid and the UCTE continental grid to increase electricity import and export and prevent the need for energy autarky

more targeted bans on single-use plastics

"give nature a legal personhood" ok grandma let’s get you to bed

§2b/a to local authorities for local small-business decarbonisation

"cease development of new nuclear power stations, as nuclear energy is much more expensive and slower to develop than renewables. we are clear that nuclear is a distraction from developing renewable energy and the risk to nuclear power stations from extreme climate events is rising fast. nuclear power stations carry an unacceptable risk for the communities living close to facilities and create unmanageable quantities of radioactive waste. they are also inextricably linked with the production of nuclear weapons. green MPs will campaign to phase out existing nuclear power stations." because some people just can't let go of the seventies. nuclear is good. nuclear is our friend

invest in r&d to find solutions to decarbonise 'residual' carbon in the economy, such as HGVs or mobile machinery

increase unharvested woodland by 50% (no time frame given), grants to farmers for scrub rewilding, rewet Pete Boggs, make 30% of the EEZ protected waters and ban bottom trawling

§4b/a in skills training to stop gas communities getting Thatchered, prioritising shifting these workers into offshore wind

a.. licensing scheme for all pet animals? you guys sure about that one

regulate animal farming with a goal of banning factory farms, ban mass routine antibiotics, ban cages/close confinement and animal mutilation

ban all hunting including coursing and "game", ban snaring, ban hunt-landscaping such as grouse moors, end the badger cull, mandate licensing of all animal workers with lifetime striking off for cruelty convictions, compulsory hedgehog holes in new fencing, 'push' for 'ending' horse and dog racing [clarification needed], new criminal offences for stealing and harming pets, 'work towards' banning animal testing

🗳️DEMOCRACY

proportional representation for parliament and all councils

abolish voter ID

votes at sixteen

votes for all visa'd migrants

restore the electoral commission's prosecutory powers and remove the cap on fines it can impose on parties

increase Short Money, especially for smaller parties

create a manifest legal category of organisation for think tanks, to allow better enforcement of lobbying and funding restrictions

consider fun new measures for political accessibility such as MP jobsharing and allowing public provision of offices for all parliamentary candidates

🎲OTHER STUFF

Self-ID including nonbinary recognition, including with an X passport marker

"work towards rejoining the eu as soon as the domestic political situation is favourable", join the eea now (with restored free movement)

let local authorities invest shares in sports teams, including professional ones, dividends ringfenced for public sports facilities and coaching

right to die

[rjzimmerman]

Wheat on repeat (Anthropocene Magazine)

Excerpt from this story from Anthropocene Magazine:

Disguised within an ordinary-looking bowl of pasta before me is a brand new ingredient, 20-years in the making, that many believe could single-handedly slash emissions, store carbon in the soil, and help the wider environment.

The neat fusilli coils contain flour ground from Kernza, a perennial wheat-like crop that produces multiple harvests from one plant, year after year after year. I received some cooking instructions to get the best out of the novel ingredient: “Don’t cover it up with a bunch of sauce! Make sure you can taste it,” says Lee DeHaan, a scientist at The Land Institute, a non-profit agriculture research organization based in Salina, Kansas, that developed the Kernza grain. I follow his guidance, drizzling in a little olive oil and a pinch of salt, and then take a bite, letting the pasta’s flavors emerge: a subtle but unmistakable hint of cinnamon, followed by nutmeg. It’s unexpectedly warm and earthy, like a salute to the rich Kansas soils that Kernza first sprouted from.

The way this crop was raised there was very different to its cousin, conventional wheat. Wheat is an annual crop, like rice and corn, which together account for almost half of the calories humanity consumes. Annuals must be planted and harvested anew each year, a system that requires farmers to heap fertilizers and herbicides onto the land, dispersed by gas-guzzling machinery that bloats agriculture’s carbon footprint. Meanwhile, repeated cycles of tilling and replanting strips the soil of nutrients, and loses vital topsoil to wind and rain. Over time, those soils may degrade, pushing farmers onto new land in search of fertile ground. 

Each mouthful of this Kernza-rich pasta, on the other hand, supports farming that locks topsoil in place and stores carbon in the earth. A growing movement of researchers, farmers, and producers believe that perennial crops have unmatched potential to reform agriculture’s warped system, and are pinning their hopes—and research dollars—on the likes of Kernza to deliver that. The grain is now cultivated across 4,000 acres of land, by over 100 farmers across the US Midwest and as far afield as Sweden and France. Its distinct aromas have made their way into craft beers, cereals, crackers, and whiskey, and have been embraced by major brands such as Patagonia. 

As a potential substitute for wheat, which covers more global land area than any other commercial crop, Kernza seems to herald a wholesome, low-carbon revolution in the vast agricultural sector. And yet 15 years since the first stands took root, the crop has only managed to capture a tiny fraction of the market, a victim of limited yields, government regulation, and a conservative farming industry. So can Kernza ever displace traditional amber waves of grain, or is it doomed to be a perennial runner-up? 

[gatheringbones]

[“While “essential workers” in the poultry industry were made to feel dirty, nonessential workers in fields like finance and computer engineering—the “people with laptops”—were sheltering in place, more distant from what transpired in industrial slaughterhouses than ever before.

Thanks to FreshDirect and Instacart, consuming meat no longer even requires coming into contact with a deli butcher or grocery clerk. With a few taps on a keyboard or the swipe of a screen, consumers can get as much beef, pork, and chicken as they want delivered to their doors, without ever having to think about where it comes from. And yet, as the popularity of bestselling books like Michael Pollan’s The Omnivore’s Dilemma and Jonathan Safran Foer’s Eating Animals attests, a lot of Americans do think about this. In recent years, more and more consumers have begun to carefully scrutinize the labels on the packages of the meat and poultry they buy. The ranks of such consumers have grown exponentially, paralleling the rise of the “good food” movement, which promotes healthier eating habits and reform of the industrial food system.

Although the movement is, in Pollan’s words, a “big, lumpy tent,” composed of a broad coalition of advocacy organizations and citizens’ groups that sometimes push for competing agendas, one of its aims is to persuade consumers to become more conscientious shoppers and eaters. Among those who put this idea into practice are so-called locavores, who buy food directly from local farms, ideally from small family-run enterprises that embrace organic, sustainable practices: ranchers who raise grass-fed cows that never set foot in industrial feedlots; farmers who sell eggs that come from free-range chickens reared on a diet of seeds, plants, and insects rather than genetically engineered corn and antibiotics.

Locavores engage in what social scientists call “virtuous consumption,” using their purchasing power to buy food that aligns with their values. The movement appeals to the growing number of Americans who want to feel more connected to the food they eat and to the people who raise it, with whom locavores can interact directly at farmers markets or through community-supported agriculture programs. It is a captivating vision, and the benefits of eating locally grown food—which is likely to be more nutritious, to come from more humanely treated animals, and to be better for the environment—are manifold.

But locavores have some blind spots of their own, most notably when it comes to the experiences of workers on small family farms. As the political scientist Margaret Gray discovered when she set about interviewing farm laborers in New York’s Hudson Valley, the vast majority of these workers are undocumented immigrants or guest workers who toil under abysmal conditions, often working sixty- to seventy-hour weeks for dismal pay. “We live in the shadows,” one worker told her. “They treat us like nothing,” said another. In her book Labor and the Locavore, Gray asked the butcher on a small farm why so few of his customers seemed to notice this.

“They don’t eat the workers,” the farmer told her.

“He went on to explain that, in his experience, his consumers’ primary concern is with what they put in their bodies,” Gray wrote, “and so the labor standards of farmworkers simply do not register as a priority.”]

eyal press, from dirty work: essential labor and the hidden toll of inequality in america, 2021

[aristotels]

Establishment of an international commission for the audit of illegitimate foreign debt.

*translation (me and google) of the goals and politics of RF (Workers Front), croatian marxist party. its a long read but its very good, it goes into eu colonialism, effects of imperial core on periphery countries etc.

The debt of the Republic of Croatia should be (partially or completely – depending on the possibilities) frozen, reprogrammed and cancelled, and an international commission should be established, following the example of Ecuador and the existing world practice, which will establish the proportion of illegitimate foreign debt in it, i.e. debt that previous authorities (in cooperation with lenders) did illegitimately, without asking the people for their opinion and without taking into account the interests of the majority of society.

One of the biggest problems that plagues many countries, especially on the periphery of world capitalism, is debt repayment (as a rule, to banks, institutions and individuals from the most developed countries of the capitalist core).

Countries on the periphery are often forced to borrow precisely because of the imposition of economic policies imposed on them by the authorities and capital of the countries of the capitalist core, through instruments such as the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the World Trade Organization (WTO), the European Union, etc.

Thus, through the establishment of "free trade" (in which the stronger and bigger always win) and often the entry of "foreign investments", the domestic industry, natural resources and agriculture of peripheral countries are destroyed, while imports and dependence on foreign economies increase. The deficit that arises after the destruction of domestic production is then compensated by borrowing on the foreign market, often in such a way that the debts are practically impossible to repay and that entire countries are condemned to permanent indebtedness, which clearly benefits those who give loans because, apart from getting rich on it without any work, provides a tool for further political pressure.

This then leads to the fact that the entire economies of countries on the periphery, again under political pressure from the most developed countries (i.e. their capitalist class), are organized in such a way that everything is subordinated to (futile) debt repayment or reforms that benefit foreign capital, and what else then it prevents the development of the indebted countries of the periphery (the governments of the countries of the capitalist core also borrow, but in such cases it works differently because they and their capital are dominant in world power relations).

The question that arises here is whether it is fair that the return of debts to a handful of usurious institutions and individuals in the most developed countries is presupposed to the development of less developed and underdeveloped countries and the interests of the majority of society in these countries?

Is it more important, for example, that an individual country has enough money for its health and education, or is it more important that the loaned money be returned to Wall Street with interest and on time?

In addition, the question arises whether it is legitimate to impose on the entire society to pay back debts that, among other things, arose as a result of the economic policy imposed by the same circles to whom the debt is owed. Is it fair that entire countries live in misery because some government, elected in who knows what way, concluded a loan agreement (often on unfavorable terms) and for who knows what purposes? Considering that such loans have never been voted on in popular referendums, can the entire society be considered forever responsible for their return? In the end - why should the question of repaying debts depend only on the one who received the money, and not on the one who lent it to someone? Doesn't the person who lends money bear a certain risk?

Why should entire countries remain in debt slavery for years just because, for example, certain foreign banks decided to make money by lending funds that they knew in advance that the respective countries would hardly (if ever) be able to pay back? Why would Croatia have to repay the debts incurred by the government of Ivo Sanader, the former prime minister now in prison for corruption, for years to come?

Such questions are not just pure theory - in practice and international law, there has been an institution of the so-called illegitimate debt precisely in the cases we were talking about. If, for example, it is concluded that the money was lent by a corrupt government under deliberately unfavorable conditions and that the lender was aware of this, it is perfectly legitimate for the loan not to be repaid, or at least not to be repaid in full.

In view of this, and based on the already existing world practice, the Workers' Front advocates the establishment of an international commission to review the illegitimate foreign debt of the Republic of Croatia (as Ecuador recently did and as SYRIZA is planning for Greece). After the audit in question, it would be seen how much of the (illegitimate) debt can be canceled, frozen or rescheduled, in whole or in part. Canceling or freezing the payment of at least part of the debts would enable the redirection of funds for the development of the country and for social welfare.

Of course, it is unnecessary to specially mention that here too the matter should be carried out in a realpolitik wise, making various tactical political alliances around the world and minimizing potential damage.

Joint struggle with labor and social movements around the world to cancel the debts and interest on the debts of less developed countries. Drastic reduction of internal debts in all countries, except for small depositors up to a certain amount, and the use of the freed money to meet basic social needs.

The debt problem is not only a problem for Croatia, but also for a large part of the world. Therefore, in solving it, one must try to work together with other progressive governments (today, primarily some Latin American countries, and in the future maybe some others), as well as with various progressive social movements around the world that are not in power. Thus, pressure could be exerted jointly from below (e.g. through protests, public campaigns, etc.) to cancel the debts of less developed and indebted countries. Such a struggle, in order to succeed, must be international.

In addition, debt problems need to be solved within the country as well. There are currently around 315,000 blocked people in Croatia. The debts of ordinary people and workers should be immediately canceled and/or reduced, thus making life easier for those whose basic existence is threatened.

In cooperation with labor and social movements in other countries, the fight to build a world system where high production technology will not be limited only to the most developed Western countries, but will be systematically and at low prices transferred to less developed countries.

The struggle for a post-capitalist world cannot be limited to just one country. Progressive forces in the world must work together to build a more socially just world economic system that will be based not on competition and the wealth of the minority and the poverty of the majority, but on the cooperation and planned development of all countries. It is completely clear that there will be many problems in the process and that this goal will not be achieved in the near future.

The current EU functions primarily in the interests of large capital in the developed Western European core. Therefore, it should be disbanded and a new united workers' Europe built on the foundations of equality, solidarity and an economy that works for the benefit of the majority of society, and in cooperation with other progressive forces of all European countries.

In an attempt to realize its anti-capitalist program, the Workers' Front firmly stands on internationalist positions, realizing that the struggle against the dictatorship of capital cannot take place within the borders of just one country. Therefore, it is completely clear that the struggle for a fairer society, as we strive for, cannot take place without cooperation with progressive forces from other countries in Europe and, ultimately, the entire world.

It is therefore completely clear that the Workers' Front is not in favor of closing Croatia within its borders, but that it supports the idea of a united Europe (and in a broader framework than the framework of the currently existing EU) on the progressive foundations of cooperation, solidarity and an economy that would work in the interests of the majority of society.

But the European Union is not an idyllic union of European unity that works for the betterment of the entire European population. Today, the EU is, above all, a neoliberal project, under whose auspices an extremely pro-capitalist policy is conducted, primarily in the interest of large Western European capital (from countries such as Germany, Austria, Scandinavia, the Netherlands, etc.), and to the detriment of peripheral and semi-peripheral countries (such as are Croatia, Slovenia, Greece, Bulgaria, Romania, but to a large extent also larger countries such as Spain, Portugal and Italy) and generally the working majority of the entire EU.

Such political orientation of the EU is clearly seen in the recent insistence of the EU on austerity measures, in which the costs of the great global crisis of 2007-8. year, they are beaten exclusively on the backs of the workforce, while favors to capital continue. In addition, there are increasingly obvious tendencies to increase the democratic deficit in the EU, where more and more powers are transferred to the largely unelected structure of the Eurobureaucracy, and even the little limited democracy that exists within the framework of capitalist liberal democracy is ignored. In the same way, the EU institutions have been promoting policies for some time, especially since the beginning of the 2007-8 crisis, which tend to abolish acquired labor rights and "flexibilization", i.e. precarious, insecure and poorly paid work.

Considering the institutionalized neoliberalism that exists in the EU, where the EU roughly sets and controls the fiscal (budgetary), monetary and general economic policy, it is completely clear that a large part of the progressive moves highlighted in these program requirements are practically impossible to carry out within the EU (despite examples like that of Hungary, where the right-wing populist government managed to defy Brussels to a certain extent in some sectors).

It is also clear that any reindustrialization of Croatia in a completely open European free market is impossible - as examples from history show, industrialization and economic development in an open market (without protectionism towards industries in their infancy) is not possible because in a free market stronger (in (in this case, large Western European industries) always win. This became quite clear immediately after Croatia's entry into the EU - despite the fact that, according to experts' estimates, Croatia could produce food for around 25 million people, the import of milk increased by 90% after July 1, 2013. and already in the first months of membership in the EU, the import of pork increased by about 300%, and eggs by 524%.

From all this, it is clear that progressive politics, despite its necessary extremely internationalist ideological orientation, cannot and must not be enslaved by misconceptions about the EU as the realization of the dream of a united Europe - the EU is not and cannot be. Such a Europe has yet to be fought for, and on completely different, progressive economic and political grounds.

Leaving NATO membership considering that it implies questionable moral and political decisions (such as military participation in the occupation of different countries), unnecessary costs (annual membership fee and purchase of weapons) and increases uncertainty (explicit inclusion in one of the global geopolitical blocs certainly does not contribute security of the country, for example in the event of a conflict between the West and Russia or China).

Membership in NATO, contrary to the proclaimed goals, does not bring any benefits to Croatia (as well as other smaller countries in a similar position). As a member of NATO, Croatia must participate (at its own expense) in imperialist occupation "peace" missions, such as the one in Afghanistan, where the Croatian army is used to enforce the geopolitical interests of the USA and other major Western countries. The costs of participating in NATO will increase even more after 2014 due to the cooling of relations with Russia (it is required to allocate 2% of GDP to the military of each of the members), and NATO membership does not in any way increase the country's security. Namely, it is very easy to see that in any future conflict (eg between Russia and the West) it would be much safer for Croatia to stay out of the entire conflict, instead of positioning itself in one of the camps. Membership in NATO does not make Croatia safer, but becomes a potential target in conflicts in which NATO participates.

The complete openness and availability of all interstate treaties, agreements and diplomatic acts and the disbandment of existing secret services to expose the trading of social interests under the slogan of "protection of national interests".

It is a common political practice that various decisions, documents and contracts are made in secret, away from the public eye, which is especially used when it comes to unpopular and unfavorable circumstances for the majority. In the last few years, some of such practices have exposed the so-called Wikileaks affair. The same applies to the secret services, which under the slogan of "protection of national interests" actually work against the interests of the majority of society, as was recently seen with the scandals exposed by Edward Snowden. Such practices should be stopped - all documents etc. of public importance must be accessible and transparent to everyone (through publication in the media and on the Internet), while the existing secret services, which are an important tool in preserving the status quo (and which work against the interests of the majority of society ), should be disbanded.

[dailyanarchistposts]

E.1.2 What is the difference between environmentalism and ecology?

As we noted in section A.3.3, eco-anarchists contrast ecology with environmentalism. The difference is important as it suggests both a different analysis of where our ecological problems come from and the best way to solve them. As Bookchin put it:

“By ‘environmentalism’ I propose to designate a mechanistic, instrumental outlook that sees nature as a passive habitat composed of ‘objects’ such as animals, plants, minerals, and the like that must merely be rendered more serviceable for human use … Within this context, very little of a social nature is spared from the environmentalist’s vocabulary: cities become ‘urban resources’ and their inhabitants ‘human resources’ … Environmentalism … tends to view the ecological project for attaining a harmonious relationship between humanity and nature as a truce rather than a lasting equilibrium. The ‘harmony’ of the environmentalist centres around the development of new techniques for plundering the natural world with minimal disruption of the human ‘habitat.’ Environmentalism does not question the most basic premise of the present society, notably, that humanity must dominant nature; rather, it seeks to facilitate than notion by developing techniques for diminishing the hazards caused by the reckless despoliation of the environment.” [The Ecology of Freedom, p. 86]

So eco-anarchists call the position of those who seek to reform capitalism and make it more green “environmentalism” rather than ecology. The reasons are obvious, as environmentalists “focus on specific issues like air and water pollution” while ignoring the social roots of the problems they are trying to solve. In other words, their outlook “rest[s] on an instrumental, almost engineering approach to solving ecological dislocations. To all appearances, they wanted to adapt the natural world to the needs of the existing society and its exploitative, capitalist imperatives by way of reforms that minimise harm to human health and well-being. The much-needed goals of formulating a project for radical social change and for cultivating a new sensibility toward the natural world tended to fall outside the orbit of their practical concerns.” Eco-anarchists, while supporting such partial structures, stress that “these problems originate in a hierarchical, class, and today, competitive capitalist system that nourishes a view of the natural world as a mere agglomeration of ‘resources’ for human production and consumption.” [Op. Cit., pp. 15–6]

This is the key. As environmentalism does not bring into question the underlying notion of the present society that man must dominate nature it cannot present anything other than short-term solutions for the various symptoms of the underlying problem. Moreover, as it does not question hierarchy, it simply adjusts itself to the status quo. Thus liberal environmentalism is so “hopelessly ineffectual” because “it takes the present social order for granted” and is mired in “the paralysing belief that a market society, privately owned property, and the present-day bureaucratic nation-state cannot be changed in any basic sense. Thus, it is the prevailing order that sets the terms of any ‘compromise’ or ‘trade-off’” and so “the natural world, including oppressed people, always loses something piece by piece, until everything is lost in the end. As long as liberal environmentalism is structured around the social status quo, property rights always prevail over public rights and power always prevails over powerlessness. Be it a forest, wetlands, or good agricultural soil, a ‘developer’ who owns any of these ‘resources’ usually sets the terms on which every negotiation occurs and ultimately succeeds in achieving the triumph of wealth over ecological considerations.” [Bookchin, Remaking Society, p. 15]

This means that a truly ecological perspective seeks to end the situation where a few govern the many, not to make the few nicer. As Chomsky once noted on the issue of “corporate social responsibility”, he could not discuss the issue as such because he did “not accept some of its presuppositions, specifically with regard to the legitimacy of corporate power” as he did not see any “justification for concentration of private power” than “in the political domain.” Both would “act in a socially responsible way — as benevolent despots — when social strife, disorder, protest, etc., induce them to do so for their own benefit.” He stressed that in a capitalist society “socially responsible behaviour would be penalised quickly in that competitors, lacking such social responsibility, would supplant anyone so misguided as to be concerned with something other than private benefit.” This explains why real capitalist systems have always “been required to safeguard social existence in the face of the destructive forces of private capitalism” by means of “substantial state control.” However, the “central questions … are not addressed, but rather begged” when discussing corporate social responsibility. [Language and Politics, p. 275]

Ultimately, the key problem with liberal environmentalism (as with liberalism in general) is that it tends, by definition, to ignore class and hierarchy. The “we are all in this together” kind of message ignores that most of decisions that got us into our current ecological and social mess were made by the rich as they have control over resources and power structures (both private and public). It also suggests that getting us out of the mess must involve taking power and wealth back from the elite — if for no other reason because working class people do not, by themselves, have the resources to solve the problem.

Moreover, the fact is the ruling class do not inhabit quite the same polluted planet as everyone else. Their wealth protects them, to a large degree, to the problems that they themselves have created and which, in fact, they owe so much of that wealth to (little wonder, then, they deny there is a serious problem). They have access to a better quality of life, food and local environment (no toxic dumps and motorways are near their homes or holiday retreats). Of course, this is a short term protection but the fate of the planet is a long-term abstraction when compared to the immediate returns on one’s investments. So it is not true to say that all parts of the ruling class are in denial about the ecological problems. A few are aware but many more show utter hatred towards those who think the planet is more important than profits.

This means that such key environmentalist activities such as education and lobbying are unlikely to have much effect. While these may produce some improvements in terms of our environmental impact, it cannot stop the long-term destruction of our planet as the ecological crisis is ”systemic — and not a matter of misinformation, spiritual insensitivity, or lack of moral integrity. The present social illness lies not only in the outlook that pervades the present society; it lies above all in the very structure and law of life in the system itself, in its imperative, which no entrepreneur or corporation can ignore without facing destruction: growth, more growth, and still more growth.” [Murray Bookchin, “The Ecological Crisis, Socialism, and the need to remake society,” pp. 1–10, Society and Nature, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 2–3] This can only be ended by ending capitalism, not by appeals to consumers to buy eco-friendly products or to capitalists to provide them:

“Accumulation is determined not by the good or bad intentions of the individual bourgeois, but by the commodity relationship itself … It is not the perversity of the bourgeois that creates production for the sake of production, but the very market nexus over which he presides and to which he succumbs… . It requires a grotesque self-deception, or worse, an act of ideological social deception, to foster the belief that this society can undo its very law of life in response to ethical arguments or intellectual persuasion.” [Toward an Ecological Society, p. 66]

Sadly, much of what passes for the green movement is based on this kind of perspective. At worse, many environmentalists place their hopes on green consumerism and education. At best, they seek to create green parties to work within the state to pass appropriate regulations and laws. Neither option gets to the core of the problem, namely a system in which there are “oppressive human beings who literally own society and others who are owned by it. Until society can be reclaimed by an undivided humanity that will use its collective wisdom, cultural achievements, technological innovations, scientific knowledge, and innate creativity for its own benefit and for that of the natural world, all ecological problems will have their roots in social problems.” [Bookchin, Remaking Society, p. 39]

[theblissfulstars]

New moon in Taurus, May 7th, 11:22pm EST

This upcoming new moon in Taurus has a much needed levity, sensuality and pleasantness that has been much needed collectively.

With a four planet stellium in Taurus, starting with a dignified Venus and ending with Jupiter, this eclipse spells massive moments in art, fashion, cosmetics and the economy. We can expect the art during this time to hit ever slightly more beautifully than it has been, and to attract our desires much easier.

All of this is taking place in the 4th house, showing that there's a focus on the inner world, our home and families. This is a cozy, intimate feeling that fosters sensitivity and gentleness and what isn't in the 4th is in the 5th, creating feelings of creativity, childlike whimsy and romance. This is a profoundly sensual and physical new moon and will inspire many of us to seek love for a night.

This new moon is all about new cycles of peace, calm and beauty. We are being given new opportunities in the realm of relationships not only to ourselves, or to others but to the very land that we are on. The environment is going to be giving us a freebie.

With Ceres in Capricorn trine Sun, Moon, Jupiter and Uranus, we can expect major reform and environmental attitudes and ideas and a presentation or proposal of new environmental legislation that can be about agriculture or the preservation and conservation of natural sites.

Similarly, Mars is dignified in Aries, showing that we have the energy necessary to go after our goals and achieve what we are looking for. However, a malefic planet being dignified is not all roses and rainbows. We can expect an acceleration, development and growth in geopolitical conflicts, particularly surrounding lies, espionage and exchange of information with its placement in the third house on and around this lunar cycle.

Mercury, Chiron and the NN in Aries are all opposite the MC, showing difficulty and conflict in diplomatic relations and negotiations that work themselves out before the end of the lunation.

There is a collective push to justice, balance and harmony with Libra MC and Athena in Sagittarius in the 11th.

There is a lot of harmonious aspects this new moon, as even Saturn is sextile the energy, creating a buzz of positive comic effects. We are going to be harvesting the beautiful fruit that we have planted in a beneficial and constructive way while also having the energy to continue on our collective quests.

Cards pulled include: The four of pentacles, the four of wands, the six of pentacles, the two of wands-This is the time of planning and collecting our resources. We are being given a positive opportunity surrounding material growth and development, this can be surrounding education, the job market, the environment, medicine and healing. This is a time of planning and looking to the future, the world is our oyster. It's only a matter of figuring out how to do it. There's a reason for celebration and coming together. Home life, connecting with family and loved ones is key.

Workings:

Love

Money

Happiness

Sex

Abundance

[zombielenin]

Marxism in The Silt Verses Universe

One thing I noticed when listening through The Silt Verses again is how easily certain Marxist ideas map onto the TSV universe and how well the podcast lends itself to Marxist analysis. Below are just a few of my observations on Marxism in the TSV universe. Also, I’ll be using some Marxist terminology in this post, which I’ll explain as I go.

Base and Superstructure in the World of TSV

What is the Base and Superstructure?

A good concept to start with would be the base and superstructure in both the Consolidated Linger Straits (CLS) and the Peninsula. In Marxist thought, society is thought to be composed of a base and a superstructure. The base can basically be described as how things are made, what is used to make them (human labor, factories, tools, and etc, AKA the means of production), and the socioeconomic relations between people in this society. In the CLS and the Peninsula, we see some of the typical elements of a modern capitalist society, whose most salient feature is private (i.e. by individuals or corporations) ownership of the means of production. There are businesses, such as factories, cafes, and marketing agencies, and they use inputs such as machinery, oil, agricultural crops, human labor, and sometimes the humans themselves as materials to produce whatever it is that they produce. One key difference though is that deities, through sacrifices and rituals, are also used as a means of producing something. We also see the typical socioeconomic relationships of a capitalist society, such as employers and business owners versus employees. The superstructure is pretty much all the other features of a society, such as culture, religion, political structures, and etc. In Marxist thought, the base and superstructure interact in a way such that the base primarily shapes the superstructure and that the superstructure justifies and maintains the base. Think for example how a capitalist society has private businesses that produce news, such as newspapers, cable news, and etc, and the news businesses create media that generally justifies and maintains the status quo. 

Base and Superstructure in the Peninsula and CLS

In the context of TSV, I think the really interesting base-superstructure relationship is the relationship between the capitalist economies of the CLS and the Peninsula and the religious system in TSV. In the TSV universe, gods such as the Petropater, the Slag King, and the Saint Electric, are part of the means of production, and hence also shape society. For example, employment contracts can require you to be sacrificed, which happened in the case of Vaughn. Also, since a god must feed, the state supplies sacrifices, which seem to be sourced from prisons in some cases. Another example is the Cloak, which is a deity specifically created for the police, an institution that in the real world exists to enforce hierarchies and the status quo and maintain capital. There are a lot of other features of the TSV universe that we can look at such as Sid Wright and the Grinding Lord, the corporate creation of the Sweet Jolly Crunchtooth as a deity for farmers, or the fact that there are militarized faiths that can be called upon in times of war, but I’ll skip them to keep this already long post from being even longer.

The Trawler Man and the Many Below - Theories on Change

Another element that I think would be interesting to explore through a Marxist lens are Paige’s god (the Many Below) and the Trawler Man who are essentially gods of social change. However, the Many Below brings progressive change and revolution, while the Trawler Man is a deity of reactionary change.  

The Many Below and Revolutionary Change

Let’s start with the Many Below. A good topic to begin with would be the reform versus revolution debate. This debate, which has been going on in leftist circles for ages, is about the strategy of achieving socialism. Here, socialism means an economic system where the means of production are owned by the people and decisions on how to use them are made collectively. Socialism is often confused for social democracy, which is a system characterized by strong social safety nets, such as universal healthcare, free education, welfare, etc. but still operating within capitalism. The reform versus revolution debate centers on whether we can reform our way into socialism by, for example, passing legislation to slowly bring it about, or if a complete overthrow of capitalism through revolution is necessary to obtain socialism. The Many Below is a revolutionary deity whose purpose is essentially to starve the other gods by stealing their sacrifices. If Paige’s plan succeeds, the current system would be completely upended, rather than being slowly chipped away at or reigned in. It seems that Paige is firmly on the side of revolution here.  Additionally, there’s a moment where Paige’s father Dennis goes on a small tirade about how Paige’s plan is misguided. It’s actually so on the nose, that it made me think that it was Jon Ware and Muna Hussen’s intent to sneak some leftist themes into TSV. Here’s the quote from Dennis in Season 2 Chapter 11 that I want to examine.

DENNIS:

And now…and now you want to hide your pamphlets in library books, like love-notes?

Listen to me, Paige. Just…listen, OK? I’m going to give you a life lesson here.

(Condescending)

If you try and seed this supposed god amongst comfortable people, amongst well-off people, you’re gonna get a deeply unhappy lesson in just how many good citizens will skim over your pamphlet once and then turn it over to the police.

(Deeply sarcastic)

And then all your hard stapling work? That’ll be for absolutely nothing.

Stop thinking like a fucking mark.

You’re smarter than this.

This isn’t a god for people like you. It’s not there to offer comfort.

It’s a god for the desperate, the hopeless - all the poor bastards across the Straits who’ve had to confront the material reality that they could be seized by five armed policemen, dragged down a corridor and hallowed any second from now.

Set your god loose in the prisons. Not the libraries, not the care homes - the prisons.

That’s where it can circulate - if there’s anything to it.

Dennis here is critiquing Paige’s strategy of trying to agitate the populace by placing propaganda for their deity in places where they may be noticed and read by others. This is not to say that using propaganda to create consciousness of one’s situation and its cause isn’t a worthwhile tactic. However, Dennis does astutely point out that circulating this propaganda amongst the comfortable is a poor strategy. Instead, he recommends that they target poor and oppressed people, especially incarcerated individuals, since they have the most revolutionary potential. Indeed, we see this tactic work with Esther. This is a classic example of the Marxist idea that class conflict, i.e. the conflict of the dispossessed against the class of business owners, investors, and landlords, is the force that causes society to move forward. 

The Trawler Man and Reactionary Change

On the other hand, we have the Trawler Man. The Trawler Man is also a god of change. However, the world that the Parish of Tides and Flesh wants to create is a world remade in the Trawler Man’s image, one remade in silt. In this way, the Parish is similar to any other group that wishes to advance their deity. They’re simply vying for supremacy while leaving the system of deities in place. sJuxtaposed with the Many Below, we see that the Trawler Man is a god of destructive change, whose followers seek to gain control of the world to return it to a primordial state (similar to how fascists wish to bring back a fictitious golden age), whereas the Many Below is a god of progressive change and wants to rid the world of deities and hence sacrifices. It’s interesting to note that once the Parish becomes useful to the Peninsula in the oncoming war with the CLS, they become fully legalized. This is an interesting parallel to how centrists and the center left are often all too willing to work with fascists when expedient. 

Other Observations

The Police

There are also a few other interesting things to note in TSV. While these aren’t explicitly Marxists ideas, they’re still popular amongst leftists. One is anti-police sentiment in TSV. In general, the police are framed in a negative light. We can see this in the characters of Daggler and the CLS police that kill Dennis. Daggler is willing to lock up innocents, and both are willing to engage in extrajudicial killing. Even early Hayward was portrayed somewhat antagonistically. The most interesting thing about law enforcement in TSV is the Stink. When a detective is failing to close cases, they begin to develop a stench, which worsens over time until they are killed by their coworkers and sacrificed to the Stink. We can see that the Stink is a metaphor for the real life institutional pressures to arrest and convict people, regardless of their guilt. This is an example of how characterizing police misconduct as a few bad apples ignores the fact that the institution of policing is rotten to its core. 

Grind and Hustle Culture

Another idea that appears a couple of times is the criticism of grind culture. One example from S1 and Sid Wright, where Sid becomes a sacrifice to the Grinding Lord and has to stay awake and be on the air until he dies. Another is Hayward’s coworker in Season 2 Episode 3, Gren, who chides Hayward for having a bad attitude and advocates for working hard and trying to impress the rich so that they may themselves become wealthy. In exchange for all this extra labor, he is rewarded with a mere disemboweling. Here we can see that for all the promises of grind and hustle culture, the only people that benefit from one’s extra labor are the capitalist class. 

Conclusion

These are just some themes I’ve noticed, but I’d love to hear what others have noticed in TSV and other podcasts. Part of me wonders if some of these themes were intentionally included, but I think the more interesting scenario would be if there was no intent and the applicability of Marxist thought in TSV is more attributable to its validity. 

[darkmaga-returns]

Putin Demolishes Western Meme that Russia is Isolated

23 October 2024 by Larry C. Johnson 48 Comments

BRICS concluded a successful second day by approving the Kazan Summit Declaration. Here are the main points:

BRICS countries called for strengthening the non-proliferation regime and nuclear-free zone in the Middle East; Stressed the need to resume the Iranian nuclear deal by all parties; Called for reform of the Bretton Woods institutions by increasing the contribution of developing countries to the world economy; BRICS will study the creation of a single transport platform to ensure multimodal logistics between the countries of association; Concerned about the escalation in the Middle East, condemned the Israeli attack on the Iranian embassy and the undermining of pagers in Lebanon; Welcome the creation of a new investment platform that uses the infrastructure of the New Development Bank; Advocated unconditional respect for the sovereignty of Syria and the protection of its territorial integrity; They support the initiative of the Russian Federation to create a Grain Exchange with coverage of other agricultural sectors in the future; Supported the adoption at the UN of the State of Palestine within the 1967 borders; Agreed to transform the New Development Bank into a multilateral development bank for emerging market countries.

Yet, the West continues to deny the implications of what is taking place in Kazan.