#participatory justice

[archivyrep]

Prosecutorial misconduct, case files, trials on trains, and "the truth" in Ace Attorney

Miles Edgeworth surrounded in the confidential files storage of the U.S. prosecutor’s office as he reads about the Avery Richman case While I noted in last week’s post that the 12th episode of Ace Attorney, a legal drama anime based on a video game series of the same name, included an evidence room, two episodes in the second season brings this to the fore even more directly. [1] In this post…

[justalittlesolarpunk]

Just spent all day facilitating a citizens’ assembly and whew, I am exhausted but so inspired. You see ordinary people, who don’t seem radical or political, coming up with ideas for free public transport and a sharing economy, calling for rewilding and housing security for all. The public are so incredible when you just give people a voice and let them know their opinion matters. I really think direct democracy could change the world, but only if it’s given the power and influence to actually inform legislation

[npdiyozane]

Scrolling through the Bojack Horseman tag as a narcissist is interesting.

[theadaptableeducator]

Toward a Just and Sustainable World: Reimagining Global Systems through Nussbaum's Capabilities Approach

Martha Nussbaum’s philosophical framework, especially her capabilities approach, provides a profound lens to examine the interconnectivity and unsustainability of colonialism, nationalism, imperialism, and capitalism. Her emphasis on human dignity, social justice, and the development of individual capabilities offers a critical standpoint from which to critique these interconnected…

[hang-on-lil-tomato]

😞🥺

I feel simultaneously very sad about the Thing (ffs there’d better be an AU fanfic where everything’s absolutely the same, except Izzy’s still there) and very happy that Stede and Ed finally got to be silly little innkeepers together.

Also, why, though. Why Izzy, of all people? You just give him a lovely redemption arc, a good story of acceptance from the crew and the journey to self-love, AND a killer speech to that asshole with the wooden schnoz, but then YOU FUCKING RUN IT INTO THE GROUND LIKE A BOAT WITH A MADMAN AT ITS PROW!

Do you UNDERSTAND what you did? The character everyone enjoyed watching grow and hurt and feel happy and learn, who finally got a chance at happiness after basing his whole life off something that only hurt him, who survived all the curveballs thrown at him, you just ABANDONED him so the story had a bit of drama in it?!

Also, if I correctly calculate, Stede & Ed (the real people!) do only 1 year at sea: this is correctly mirrored in the show; they leave seafaring after about a year (1717-1718)

Meanwhile, Isreal Hands is said to have continued after Ed Teach and Stede Bonnet stopped; he’s on PHYSICAL records (for testimony against Ed’s corruption, but such details are not the most important in the show’s contents. [what IS, you mothers and sons of fuckers, is how long he fucking LIVED!]) as being alive and well after both pirates’ end of careers: he was recuperating from a bullet wound (see what you could’ve DONE THERE, you?! See how symbolic it could’ve been for him to recover from that bullet he took, this time not ferreted away in secrecy, but cared for by the crew, and, most importantly, in the place where he finally felt welcome? To heal and get better, becoming captain like he was [IRL] of Blackbeard’s ship the Adventure? TO FINALLY FEEL AT HOME AND SAFE?! To have CLOSURE?!)

But NOOOOOO, you just HAD to kill the guy off, and for what? Was the intent to make it more dramatic? To amplify people’s feelings while watching the show? Because what has been done here is a deliberate killing off of a very prominent character, with no obvious or logical reason for doing so in view.

Now, this is certainly a complaint against the writing choices for the show, but can’t we also blame HBO, who crammed it into 8 episodes instead of 10? Would it be better if they had more stuff to work with; would there have been less need for drama and melancholy? I would strongly prefer slower episodes, to cramming the storyline into only eight, and just throwing random shit at the whiteboard and seeing what sticks. You understand? That drama is not the answer? That having him recover, or better yet, just not have him get shot at all, would be so much funner to wrap up ROMANTIC COMEDY with?!

For fuck’s sake, we don’t even really know when Izzy died; the only record we have is from 1724, when Captain Charles Johnson said in his book “A General History Of The Pyrates” that he died a beggar in London.

See how fucking open ended that is? Just a questionable source, giving a rather vague claim? How EASY it would be to have him… well, pretty much do anything except get randomly shot in 1718? They did it for Ed and Stede, they could very easily do it for Izzy.

At least, if they wanted something exciting/dramatic, have him be captured by the English and testify against Ed as an innocent bystander who Teach maimed; and somehow build from there. Maybe he could become a craftsman and fade into obscurity, enjoying a quiet life on land. Maybe become a singer at a bar, having a good time as himself (he wasn’t bad at the party, he could sure use that to his advantage!) Maybe he could run into the crew, just as he’s about to be executed, or as he’s being hanged, and be liberated by them; to rejoin their crew as their beloved unicorn. Maybe he could get lost and presumed dead in the chaos, only to be found alive and his usual slightly damp, permanently cranky state of being a while later.

I now feel quite disappointed to be deprived of my, and a lot of people’s, favorite weird little one-legged grouch.

Godspeed to the fic makers, I wish you all the best of winds in your sails, which sadly appears to have left that small part of the story itself. Make me proud and use as many adjectives as you like; I’d love to learn how many words you can find to convey “strange and slightly greasy”.

[thebookmarker99]

I think people don't talk enough about how Charlie and Alastor are parallels to each other.

Let's keep in mind, Vivziepop has gone on to say Alastor and Charlie are the main characters of the series, and their relationship & growth is a huge plot point in the show. They are not only the faces of the series, their dynamic is the focal point of what constitutes redemption from two different perspectives.

They're literally narrative foils to each other. In order for this foil dynamic to work, Charlie has to be what Alastor once was, while Alastor has to be what Charlie can become.

Alastor upholds principles of traditional punitive justice. A "serial killer" dubbed a vigilante in his living years, enforcing his theory of justice through retribution rather than rehabilitation. Retribution to Alastor is not a black and white solution, but as a vigilante he believes punishment should be administered because the offender deserves it. Notice how he has it out for people in Hell who he considers flawed in some way (Lucifer, Overlords, loansharks). His idea of punishment must be proportionate to the crime committed-- "an eye for an eye" -- he is otherwise fairly cordial and, if we're looking at the women in his life, pretty protective of who he considers innocent to a fault. This explains why Alastor does not believe in redemption. To him, everybody in Hell, EVEN HIMSELF, are there as punishment for a reason and he gives NO excuse why he nor they should be spared.

Note: this has nothing to do with Hell's hierarchy or the fact Alastor wants to climb the ranks in a power hungry system. He doesn't believe in redemption, and he does not believe in his own redemption.

Now, let's look at Charlie and her idea of justice. Charlie believes in restorative justice, which hugely contrasts Alastor's philosophy. Restorative justice is approached by focusing on repairing the harm caused by unjust systems and criminal behaviour through participatory exercises which involve the victim, the offender, and the community. The purpose is to address the harm caused to the victims and discuss with the community over the responsibility of the offender in order to make amends.

In this process, Charlie believes involving all stakeholders are needed to bring about justice. Restorative justice requires offenders to confront their actions and go through a rehabilitation process, which is the entire point of Charlie's hotel. This is why she encourages healthy activities in order to fix criminals (sinners) and lead them back into society (Heaven).

This contrast in ethics from both Alastor and Charlie is immediately told to us in the pilot episode, where Alastor admits he doesn't believe in redemption (inside of every demon is a lost cause). Charlie explains she believes everyone deserves a chance at it (inside of every demon is a rainbow).

Alastor's strength in this response is that it upholds the rule of law, and in a funny way it's quite similar to Adam and Heaven's views (think of it as a criminal and a police officer having the same view on justice). Alastor's weaknesses in this perspective enable the cycle of abuse as it does not aim to care about any of the parties' needs as a result of being harmed, or addressing what caused this behaviour.

Charlie's strengths lie in her holistic approach to redemption. She believes through this response she can hold the sinners' accountable by addressing their needs, healing their trauma, and thus repairing their relationship with the community. Her weaknesses are her naivity and struggling to apply harsh judgement on severe crimes.

This is why Alastor and Charlie need each other. They make up for what the other lacks, and through a solid friendship they can learn a lot from one another.

It's a tale as old as time with narrative foils, as I mentioned above. One must see themselves in the other. One must embody what the other can become. Alastor sees a pure, younger version of himself in Charlie, but he thinks she's silly and naive because he has been jaded and has lived a life entirely different from hers. Still, her gentleness could reach him. On the other side, Alastor is cunning and smart; he's willing to enforce punishment on who believes is deserving of it. Charlie is frightened of hurting others, but Alastor as her mentor can teach her to become stronger.

Alastor and Charlie need each other.

[the-garbanzo-annex-jr]

by Ruth Wisse

Hamas recently beat the competition with a demonstration of savagery unlike the earlier improvised pogroms in Europe to which it has been compared. October’s slaughters were plotted with crucial input from Gazans employed in Israeli homes they had scouted and mapped for the purpose, making this the first military campaign designed to culminate in acts of beheading, torture, and rape of predetermined victims. As attempts to destroy Israel through conventional warfare had only made Israel militarily stronger, the new tactics aimed at destroying the Jews’ will to remain among antagonists sworn never to leave them in peace. More than to intimidate, these attacks were made to demoralize.

Survivor-witnesses describe new refinements of psychological warfare. Hamas murdered parents and children in each other’s presence so as to sharpen the survivors’ agony. They took hostages—not, as others do, for eventual exchange—but to taunt the country with images of prisoners’ suffering, and fear that many would never be returned. Every Jewish value—respect for women, honoring the human being who was made in the image of God—was gleefully defiled.

As for the Jews living in nearby Gaza, many of them self-described Jewish “peaceniks,” they had prided themselves on the medical help and hospitality they extended to their Gazan neighbors, persuaded that cooperation was obviously to everyone’s benefit. The terrorists exploited the Jews’ desire for peace as a means of entrapment and further opportunity for torment. By attacking on a Jewish holiday and a secular festival, they intended to destroy the Israelis’ joy in life. Anyone reading Dan Senor and Saul Singer’s exhilarating book about the collective strengths that constitute The Genius of Israel will recognize how Hamas turned precisely those virtues into weapons of torture to tear the Jewish people apart.

October’s slaughters were plotted with crucial input from Gazans employed in Israeli homes they had scouted and mapped for the purpose, making this the first military campaign designed to culminate in acts of beheading, torture, and rape of predetermined victims.

Nor does this exhaust their inventiveness. The Arabs’ strategy of martyring generations of their own people in the cause of eliminating Israel dates back to the 1947 refusal of Arab leaders to accept the partition of Palestine into two states—in order to keep Arabs perpetually homeless. Arabs were to remain permanently displaced as evidence of Israel’s “occupation” while Israel integrated the over 800,000 Jewish refugees from Arab lands and granted participatory citizenship to over 2 million Arabs who chose to remain in its boundaries.

Taking this tactic of martyring their fellow Arabs to a new level, Hamas turned Gaza into suicide central. Above ground, residents were allowed to conduct a quasi-normal life, knowing that, below ground, every school, every hospital, and many private homes were booby-trapped for the Israelis whom their leaders would lure into their cities. The IDF continues to uncover a tremendous amount of infrastructure built over years, confirming Hamas’ intention of invading and killing Israelis en masse. In the words of one of its soldiers “[It] is clear they expected us to arrive and laid plans to exact a cost in the form of IDF casualties.” The attack of Oct. 7 had to be monstrous enough to provoke Israel into full-scale war in the hope of rescuing the hostages and destroying the terrorists—a plan that would also ensure the collateral death of as many Gazans as possible to attract Western sympathy.

[sefaradweb]

La Ciudad conmemora el 30º aniversario del atentado a la AMIA

🇦🇷 El 18 de julio de 2024 se conmemora el 30º aniversario del atentado a la Asociación Mutual Israelita Argentina (AMIA) en Buenos Aires, donde un coche bomba explotó frente al edificio en Pasteur 633, causando la muerte de 85 personas y hiriendo a más de 300. En honor a este trágico evento, el Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires ha organizado diversas acciones conmemorativas. Entre ellas, un encuentro con jóvenes de la comunidad judía y la actualización del Mapa Interactivo "Huellas de la Memoria BA" con nuevas incorporaciones, como la Plaza Víctimas del atentado a AMIA y murales conmemorativos.

El jueves 18 de julio se realizará un acto central en la sede de la AMIA, con la presencia de autoridades locales, representantes de la comunidad judía y familiares de las víctimas. Este acto incluye la reapertura de la estación Pasteur-AMIA de la Línea B de subte, renovada para mejorar la circulación y honrar la memoria de las víctimas. Además, el miércoles 17 se llevará a cabo el tradicional Acto de Juventud en Pasteur 633, con propuestas musicales y actividades participativas, reafirmando el compromiso con la memoria y la justicia.

🇺🇸 On July 18, 2024, the 30th anniversary of the bombing of the Argentine Israelite Mutual Association (AMIA) in Buenos Aires is commemorated. The car bomb explosion in front of the building at Pasteur 633 resulted in 85 deaths and over 300 injuries. To honor this tragic event, the Buenos Aires City Government has organized various commemorative actions. These include a meeting with young members of the Jewish community and updating the Interactive Map "Huellas de la Memoria BA" with new additions such as the Plaza Víctimas del atentado a AMIA and commemorative murals.

On Thursday, July 18, a central ceremony will be held at the AMIA headquarters, attended by local authorities, Jewish community representatives, and victims' families. This event includes the reopening of the Pasteur-AMIA station on the B subway line, renovated to improve circulation and honor the victims' memory. Additionally, on Wednesday, July 17, the traditional Youth Act will take place at Pasteur 633, featuring musical proposals and participatory activities, reaffirming the commitment to memory and justice.

[leftistfeminista]

Chilean Feminists protest to reclaim the torture center for women "Venda Sexy"

Exciting and participatory activity by the Recovery of the Torture House Venda Sexy for Women's Active Memory. The companions of the Cueca Sola, the "street starters, the Collective Against Oblivion, the Collective of Women Survivors Always Resilient, all and all attendees, all words, all demonstrations form the foundations of this collective construction of memory rescue and the struggle of the women against dictatorship and our tireless walk for justice and against IMPUNITY.

LONG LIVE THE WOMEN WHO FIGHT!!!

[dailyanarchistposts]

Empire’s radical monopoly over life

Ivan Illich was a prominent radical intellectual in the 1970s, but aside from his radical critique of schooling, is not well-known today. For Illich, modern schooling was only one of the many ways that dependence was being entrenched—a dependence not only on capitalist production and consumption, but on a whole violent, industrialized, disciplined, and controlled way of life. His concept of radical monopoly points to something more systematic than the control over a particular market by a particular firm. Instead, radical monopoly gets at the way that Empire monopolizes life itself: how people relate to each other, how they get around, how they get their sustenance, and the whole texture of everyday life. A world built for cars forces out other ways of moving, and modern building codes and bylaws make it impossible and illegal for people to build their own dwellings, or even to live together at all if they cannot pass as a nuclear family. Modern medicine does not just create a new way of understanding the body: its scientific understanding is premised on a radical monopoly over health, and the subjugation (or commodification) of other healing traditions. To be healthy under Empire is to be a properly functioning, able-bodied, neurotypical individual capable of work, and to be sick often means becoming medicalized: isolated, confined, and dependent on strangers and experts. Law, policing, and prisons monopolize the field of justice by enforcing cycles of punishment and incarceration, forcing out the capacity of people to protect each other and resolve conflicts themselves. The rise of industrial agriculture has been accompanied by a loss of the convivial relations surrounding subsistence: the connection to the growing and processing of food, the intimacy with ecosystems and seasons it entails, and the collective rituals, celebrations, and practices that have accompanied these traditions. Empire’s infrastructure induces dependence on forms of production, specialized knowledge, expertise, and tools that detach people from their capacities to learn, grow, build, produce, and take care of each other.

Since Illich wrote, these monopolies have folded into ever more diffuse and generalized forms of control, sunk deeper into the fabric of life. Deleuze called this new form of power taking shape over the course of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries “control societies.”[102] Rather than telling people exactly what to do, this mode of power regularizes life, calling forth certain ways of living and feeling, and making other forms of life die. Surveillance no longer ends when one exits a particular institution: through social media, smartphones, browsing histories, and credit cards, surveillance is ubiquitous, continuous, and increasingly participatory. We are enjoined to share, consume, and express ourselves, and every choice feeds back into algorithms that predict our habits and preferences with ever increasing precision. The performance of self-expression is constantly encouraged, and as the Institute for Precarious Consciousness writes, “Our success in this performance in turn affects everything from our ability to access human warmth to our ability to access means of subsistence, not just in the form of the wage but also in the form of credit.”[103] Under this apparatus, there is little room for silence, nuance, listening, exploration, or the rich subtleties of tone and body language. Anything too intense or subversive is either incorporated or surgically removed by security, police, or emergency personnel. Class, anti-Blackness, Islamophobia, ableism and other structured forms of violence are coded into the algorithms that make everyone a potential terrorist, thief, or error. Even those who are supposed to enjoy the most—those who can afford the newest screens and the most expensive forms of consumption—are inducted into a state of nearly constant distraction, numbness, and anxiety.

Perpetual individualization obscures the crushing collective effects of Empire. When this form of control is working, interactions are hypervisible, superficial, predictable, and self-managed. To be constantly mistrusted and controlled is also to be detached from one’s own capacity to experiment, make mistakes, and learn without instruction or coercion. To internalize the responsibilities of neoliberal individualism is to sink into the mesh of control and subjection. The responsible economic subject owns her own property, pays her own debts, invests in her future, and meets her needs and desires through consumption. She is individually responsible for her health, her economic situation, her life prospects, and even her emotional states. These forms of subjection make it difficult to imagine—let alone participate in—collective alternatives. From the dependence on armed strangers to resolve conflicts, to the hum of an extraction-fuelled world, to the glow of screens that beckon attention, to the stranglehold of policy and bureaucracy, to the intergenerational violence and abuse that permeate lovers and families, Empire is constantly entrenching dependence on a world that makes joy, trust, and responsibility difficult.

It is not a question of revealing this to people, as if they are dupes. Struggling amid these forms of control means grappling with their affective hold on us and our daily lives. Anxiety, addiction, and depression are not merely secrets to reveal or illusions to dispel. Preaching about Empire’s horrors can stoke cynicism or ironic detachment rather than undoing subjection. One can still feel bound and depleted, despite one’s awareness. Empire’s subjects are “free” to be mistrustful and resentful of the system under which they live. One can hate Empire as much as one wants, as long as one continues to work, pay rent, and consume. There is no simple correspondence between intentions and actions, as if the problem is simply figuring out what to do and doing it. Undoing subjection is not about conscious opposition, or finding a way to be happy amidst misery. Challenging Empire’s radical monopoly over life means interrupting its affective and infrastructural hold, undoing some of our existing attachments and desires, and creating new ones.

[belgianhistoryguy]

The major political parties of Belgium

So, I'm Belgian, and our politics is a lovely complicated mess, so let's go over the major political parties together shall we? Before we do that though you have to know that the major families are divided by language.

The Dutch speaking parties

Groen: literally meaning green, the dutch-speaking ecologist party, broadly left, a lot of socialist policies with more of a emphasis on nature and a burning hatred for nuclear power.

Vooruit: literally meaning forward, this is the socialist party on this side of the language border. They have a lot your standard socialist standpoints (strong unions, higher wages, strong social safety measures) and are also socially/culturally left, being pro lgbtq+, for expanding abortion access... They are also less scared of nuclear power.

Open VLD: translates as the open flemish liberal democrats (yeah this is where the names start to become acronyms). This party is liberal in the non american sense, that is to say they are pro free market, pro business, believes that prices regulate themselves, doesn't think the government should own companies... They are also socially liberal, for expanding access to abortion and euthanasia, as well as surrogacy.

CD&V: translates as christian, democratic and flemish, a christian democratic party, with a somewhat weird dichotomy of pro worker and pro business standpoints (which involves some 150 years of belgian history involving the catholic party and the daensists). Broadly somewhat centrist swinging left or right depending on the issue. In favour of affordable access to healthcare and other progressive economic policies, but opposed to for example abortion, euthanasia and surrogacy.

N-VA: the new-Flemish alliance, socially conservative and economically liberal but especially the larger of the two Flemish nationalist parties (that is, being in favor of breaking up Belgium with an independent Flanders, which is the northern, dutch speaking half of Belgium). In favour of lower taxes, against higher minimum wages, tough on immigration but not by far as racist about it as the next party. Socially it is a mixed bag, supports lgbtq rights (to an extent) and abortion access.

Vlaams belang: Literally Flemish interest, the country's most far right party: again this party is Flemish-Nationalist. Immigration and integration are this party's key issue, holding identitarian beliefs. The party claims to not be neoliberal but the media and at least one major labour union disagree with that. They campaign under slogans such as "making flanders yours again", and are hostile to muslim fundamentalism and political islam anywhere they see or perceive it. Some conservative muslims do in turn vote for the party because of its socially right wing standpoints, supporting what it considers traditional norms and values. The party is also subject of the so called "cordon sanitaire", an agreement between the other major parties to not govern with VB. Members of other parties who do govern with VB are liable to lose their membership

The French (and German) speaking parties

Ecolo: short for the French word for ecological this is the French-speaking ecologist/green party. Again they hold broadly socialist and ecologist beliefs, want to fight climate change and promote new political practices to make Belgium more of a participatory democracy.

PS: literally translating as "socialist party" this is, rather unsurprisingly, the French-speaking socialist party, standing for much the same things as Vooruit, supporting equality, fair work, social justice and international solidarity. This party suplied the country's openly gay former prime minister, Elio di Rupo.

MR: literally translating as "reformer movement" or "reformist movement". Another liberal party, in favour of free markets and less government intervention in the economy, as well as social freedoms such as abortion and euthanasia.

Les Engagés: literally "the engaged ones", a centrist and progressive party again with origins in the Christian-democrat movement. They are similarly socially liberal but not as much as, for example the PS or ecolo. Economically they are also more or less liberal with the occasional more social minded idea.

DéFI: short for "democratic, federalist, independent" this party claims to represent the interests of French speakers in Brussels and Wallonia. Their ideology is a mix centrism, federalism (expanded power to the regions instead of the Belgian federal government.), social liberalism and some mild nationalism. This party is a split off from MR.

The one major party active in the entire country

PVDA-PTB: translating as the "party of labour of Belgium" this is the country's Marxist communist party (not in some hyperbolic sense, that is their official political ideology. The party is a strong proponent of LGBTQ right, abortion and euthanasia access. It is opposed to market capitalism and in the shorter term wishes to expand the Belgian social safety net. It is also severely anti NATO. Its rhetoric has rather little space for any nuance, earning it a stamp as a populist party.

[omegaphilosophia]

Alternatives to Capitalism

Identifying economic systems that may be considered better than capitalism depends on the criteria used for comparison, such as equity, sustainability, and overall societal well-being. Here are some alternative systems, each with its potential benefits and drawbacks:

1. Social Democracy

Description:

A political, social, and economic philosophy within a capitalist framework that emphasizes social justice, government intervention, and the welfare state.

Benefits:

Equity: Strong focus on reducing inequality through progressive taxation and wealth redistribution.

Welfare: Comprehensive social safety nets, including healthcare, education, and unemployment benefits.

Regulation: Strict regulations on businesses to protect workers, consumers, and the environment.

Drawbacks:

Economic Efficiency: Potentially higher taxes and regulation can impact business incentives and economic efficiency.

Government Size: Large government programs may lead to bureaucratic inefficiencies.

Examples:

Scandinavian countries like Sweden, Norway, and Denmark.

2. Democratic Socialism

Description:

A political philosophy that advocates for political democracy alongside social ownership of the means of production, extensive welfare programs, and economic planning.

Benefits:

Social Ownership: Emphasis on worker cooperatives and public ownership can lead to more equitable wealth distribution.

Democratic Control: Democratic decision-making processes in economic planning aim to meet the needs of the majority.

Social Welfare: Extensive welfare programs ensure basic needs are met for all citizens.

Drawbacks:

Economic Efficiency: May face challenges in innovation and efficiency due to reduced profit motives.

Implementation: Transitioning to this system can be difficult and disruptive.

Examples:

Elements found in policies proposed by some political parties and movements in various countries, though not fully implemented anywhere on a national scale.

3. Eco-Socialism

Description:

A blend of socialism and environmentalism, focusing on social ownership and ecological sustainability.

Benefits:

Sustainability: Prioritizes environmental health and sustainable development.

Social Equity: Combines social ownership with efforts to reduce inequality.

Community Focus: Emphasizes local, decentralized economies and participatory democracy.

Drawbacks:

Economic Growth: May limit economic growth due to stringent environmental regulations.

Scalability: Localized economies may struggle to scale and integrate into global markets.

Examples:

Green political movements and policies, though not fully implemented as a national system.

4. Participatory Economics (Parecon)

Description:

An economic system based on participatory decision-making, worker and consumer councils, and equitable distribution of resources.

Benefits:

Democracy: Emphasizes direct participation in economic decision-making.

Equity: Focus on equitable distribution of income and resources.

Efficiency: Aims to align production with social needs and reduce waste.

Drawbacks:

Complexity: Requires significant coordination and participation, which can be challenging on a large scale.

Transition: Moving from a capitalist system to Parecon would be complex and require significant societal changes.

Examples:

Theoretical and has not been implemented on a large scale, but certain cooperative movements and local experiments reflect its principles.

5. Commons-Based Peer Production

Description:

An economic system that emphasizes collaborative, decentralized production, often facilitated by digital platforms, and focuses on shared resources (the commons).

Benefits:

Innovation: Encourages open collaboration and innovation.

Sustainability: Reduces resource waste through shared use and collaborative consumption.

Empowerment: Empowers individuals and communities through direct participation and control over production.

Drawbacks:

Monetization: Can struggle with monetizing contributions and ensuring fair compensation.

Scalability: May face challenges in scaling beyond certain sectors, especially those not easily digitized.

Examples:

Open-source software projects, Wikipedia, and other collaborative platforms.

Conclusion

Each of these systems offers alternative approaches to address some of the shortcomings of capitalism, such as inequality, environmental harm, and exploitation. However, they also come with their own set of challenges and trade-offs. The best system may involve a hybrid approach, incorporating elements from various systems to balance economic efficiency, social equity, and environmental sustainability.

[theadaptableeducator]

Exploring Sustainable Alternatives: Interconnecting and Addressing the Unsustainability of Colonialism, Nationalism, Imperialism, and Capitalism Through Nagel’s Philosophy

Thomas Nagel, a prominent contemporary philosopher, has significantly contributed to discussions on ethics, political philosophy, and the nature of consciousness. While he may not have directly addressed the interconnectivity and unsustainability of colonialism, nationalism, imperialism, and capitalism in a comprehensive manner, his work provides a robust framework to explore these topics through…

[dipperdesperado]

harm reduction is solarpunk

I’ve been doing a lot of thinking and writing about solarpunk actions and ideas that might not be normally considered solarpunk. One of those ideas that I’ve been really interested in recently is harm reduction.

Harm reduction is a way of thinking about harmful things that people do and their repercussions. As it sounds like, it’s meant to reduce the harm that these things cause. It’s an answer to targeted responses to situations that don’t holistically address the root causes. It also thinks about ways to support people that are stigmatized for the ways they cope with these root causes. Instead of asking people to change their individual responses to systemic issues, there is a focus on how to make those responses as safe as possible.

This aligns with the systems-focus and strategically holistic approach to social change that is paramount to solarpunk. While certain things, like drug abuse, should not be a thing, we can’t respond to that issue without having an understanding of the social factors that lead to maladaptive coping mechanisms, and destigmatize existing in those social situations. This is not to say that we endorse drug abuse, but creating safe spaces for drug use and treatment, while also building toward responding to wider issues can be very powerful. This thinking allows solarpunks to have the empathy and restorative justice orientation important to bringing the futures they want to see to life.

Harm reduction also allows people to build self-sufficiency. In the context of drug use, programs like needle exchanges and overdose prevention sites allow people to engage in safer practices in self-managed ways. Giving people the tools and resources to lower risks and improve their health is super solarpunk. Instead of giving them the care, or just providing access to the care, the community can dynamically organize to do both when necessary.

Solarpunk can be enhanced by the ideas of harm reduction to usher in futures that aren’t just renewable and participatory but are compassionate, empowering, and empathetic at their roots.

[facesofcsl]

Christina Battle, PhD - Media Artist

Christina Battle (she/her) is a film and video media artist based in Edmonton and Treaty 6.

What does your work entail?

My work initially centered on film and video, focusing on how media takes time—not only to create but also to communicate stories and ideas. Over time, I began applying that same sensibility to other artistic disciplines, particularly participatory practices. These practices often involve performance artists whose work consists in working with communities, creating projects, and developing frameworks that encourage participation. By engaging public groups and fostering interaction, my work aims to explore and expand the boundaries of art as a shared experience.

How does your work overlap with Community Service Learning (CSL)?

There’s a significant overlap between my artistic practice and CSL, particularly in the shared focus on community building and the complexities of what it means to “be in community.” The term “community” is used so broadly in both art and society that it often requires unpacking.

CSL offers an incredible opportunity to slow down and ask foundational questions: What does it mean to engage in community? How can we imagine new ways of connecting? My work also asks similar questions—how do we build relationships, understand one another, and decide who we want to engage with? Both approaches involve exploring how we create spaces for connection and collaboration.

How do you incorporate CSL students into your work?

In Spring 2023, I was invited by Lisa Prins and Allison Sivak (CSL course instructors), to share my practice with their CSL 370 class, which focused on plants and gardening—topics that resonate deeply with my work around seeds, plants, and climate change. We met in a park one afternoon, where I brought seeds and shared my projects. The conversations were some of the most engaging I’ve had. While my projects often appeal to artists, this group approached the work from a different perspective, yet shared a genuine interest in the intersections of community, art, and environmental issues.

In Spring 2024, Lisa and Allison invited me to engage more deeply with their course, and I eagerly accepted because of my positive experience the previous year. Collaborating with their students has been incredibly rewarding, creating spaces for shared knowledge and fostering conversations about topics I’m passionate about.

What have you learned by being involved with CSL?

Teaching art and design for 15 years has taught me a lot about pedagogy, but CSL offered a profoundly different approach to learning. Unlike traditional classrooms, which often rely on rigid hierarchies and lecture-based knowledge transmission, CSL fosters experiential, relational, and participatory modes of learning. This aligns perfectly with my practice, where learning alongside and from others is key.

The CSL classroom challenged me to rethink the boundaries of knowledge and how we connect with each other’s histories, cultures, and experiences. It was refreshing to work with students who didn’t identify as artists but were eager to explore art as a tool for justice, politics, and environmental concerns. The openness of the CSL framework allowed us to bypass the conventions of artistic training and dive directly into the complexities of the world we live in.

What do you hope CSL students take away from your presence in the classroom?

I hope students see artistic practice as a powerful strategy for communication. Art isn’t just about self-expression—it’s about relationality and finding ways to connect with others, especially around complex issues like climate change and social justice. Participatory art, in particular, focuses on building relationships and exploring how we can engage with the world in meaningful ways.

Working with the CSL class reminded me of the collective desire to address these challenges. While individual action can feel isolating, coming together in shared spaces—whether through art, conversation, or collaboration—can inspire new strategies for expression and problem-solving. I hope the students left with a sense of empowerment to use creative tools to communicate and enact change.

How has your involvement with CSL impacted you?

One lasting memory from my time with the CSL class is tied to the sunflower seeds we worked with. When the class ended, I took home some of the seeds we had discussed and distributed. Over the summer, I harvested seeds from the plants that grew, creating a physical reminder of our shared experience. This ongoing relationship with the seeds feels symbolic of community building—an ongoing, iterative process that takes time and care but can yield incredible results.

Another moment that stood out was during a postcard-making session. One student hesitated, saying, “I’m not an artist,” yet created an absolutely stunning piece. It reminded me that the label of “artist” can be limiting. Many people create beautiful, meaningful work without having been formally trained or identifying with the term. Moments like these reinforce the importance of opening up definitions of art and helping people see its potential as a universal tool for storytelling and connection.

How would you sum up your experience with CSL?

CSL has been an inspiring opportunity for community building, knowledge sharing, and mutual learning. Rather than a traditional artist talk where I simply present my work, the CSL classroom was an activated, relational space where I learned as much as I taught. It was a powerful reminder of the value of slowing down, fostering connections, and embracing art as a tool for collective exploration.

[lonestardust]

I agree with you! I've seen some arguments that Carlos should let go of his hunt for Gabriel's killer, and the unspoken assumption is that doing so would give him closure, maybe because it would mean prioritising his marriage and that should be more inportant to him. But the show has been very clear that that isn't the case. In the same way that TK's marriage to Carlos isn't more important to him than his desire to take care of Jonah, Carlos can't prioritise his marriage to TK if that means the end of his search for justice. And perhaps TK's love for Jonah is more palatable than Carlos's relentless pursuit so we're more inclined to think TK is right and Carlos is wrong, but I'm hopeful the show is going to keep doing what it's been doing and show that Carlos's mission is valid and that, and only that, will bring him the peace he needs to move forwards.

yes YES i hope carlos wins more than anything anon!!! even storytelling wise he's a character who's been struggling with a storyline for too long it's only fair to do it justice and give him the proper resolution he's been literally seeking!

don't think i grasp the point about prioritising here but their marriage is in no way less important to either of them, if anything that's heart of the struggle because separating isn't an option for these two, i mean carlos calling it "we're in the middle of a thing" even though realistically the kids talk would end marriages but that's not the case with tarlos.

and great point bringing up "TK's love for jonah being more palatable than carlos' pursuit"!! because that's a massive underlying real issue i have with the values of the white western system in general, whether it's manifested in its art or the real world (even though that's not what the show is telling us. but somehow you feel it.. idk, the choice of words to call it obsession and carlos obsessed/like living with an addict, doesn't sit right with me. even though i get that it's about how laser focused he is and I swear I understand that TK is coming from a good place, he's worried about him and he does say that "it's very understandable and that's what makes it so much harder", it just feels like it's pathologizing what's very much an instinct carlos is acting on. I mean could you imagine andrea calling gabriel that about pursuing a case? or carlos having the same conversation about TK and his addiction "he's obsessed with sobriety" I don't think so.. or maybe that's just me), the idea that the sacrifice for justice isn't as tolerable or acceptable in a world that imposes seeking it on you very often is very cancerous and debilitating. it's like you're only allowed to be a victim in this world, and if you try to seek correcting that, then that's questionable. and carlos has been really questioned in takes, even though i try to focus on what the show is narrating but i can't help letting it get it me because fandom is a participatory culture about this exactly, a space to have these conversations and express how we feel