I don’t really agree with the introduction. Rich countries stopping to emit co2 is not the same as poor countries doing it. It takes a transition for rich countries obviously, but they do have the money and resources to do it. Unlike poor countries.
Also, the problem of resources consumption is a problem of consumerism, which is a staple of capitalism. But neither one or the other is necessary to live a comfortable life. In fact, they are both proven to make the lives of most people miserable.
And we don’t need superheroes to save the world. We merely need states that will put companies to their place, and start doing stuff for the nation rather than sabotaging itself for the benefit of a few.
Which lead to the insidious and toxic idea of liberalism that it’s impossible, governments will always be corrupted. It’s wrong, and this idea only serve capitalism and liberlism. A powerful state is the only solution to fight these parasites.
But fighting the liberal mindset and the idea that the government is the problem is a difficult fight that no super hero can fight.
Which lead to the insidious and toxic idea of liberalism that it’s impossible, governments will always be corrupted. It’s wrong, and this idea only serve capitalism and liberlism. A powerful state is the only solution to fight these parasites.
Sorry, but you got that totally backwards (liberalism only has is half-way backwards). A powerful state is what makes it possible for these companies to exists and do the damage they do. They are nearly interchangeable with the state, and the further down a state goes towards fascism the more true this becomes.
Explaining this is out of scope of this community… but currently it is the police that is protecting these companies and the courts that are jailing activists. If you think the state is (or even can be) on our side, you are gravely mistaken.
I firmly disagree. No state merely means a feudal state in my opinion, with the rich and companies being the lords. You can’t prevent them from seizing and enslaving places and people without a strong authority to rule them.
Then, making a state work for the people rather than the companies is another matter.
Unless you can somehow make a state hold itself accountable for its actions I don’t see that we’ll ever get a state that works for the people. Of course there’s a spectrum with some states worse than others, but to have to constantly fight off authoritarian structures who want more power over you shouldn’t be the norm.
On the other hand, as I said, no state means a feudal state. If rich men or organisation are not reigned in some way, they will seize the power for themselves. It is actually what’s happening in liberal countries.
With more cynism it is how societies work: an armed group seize a place for its profit or comfort. Until it’s submitted to a more powerful armed group. Democracy arise when the armed group want peace from the people under its rule. Or when the people are the biggest part of the army and get to organise themselves to take over.
I don’t really agree with the introduction. Rich countries stopping to emit co2 is not the same as poor countries doing it. It takes a transition for rich countries obviously, but they do have the money and resources to do it. Unlike poor countries.
Also, the problem of resources consumption is a problem of consumerism, which is a staple of capitalism. But neither one or the other is necessary to live a comfortable life. In fact, they are both proven to make the lives of most people miserable.
And we don’t need superheroes to save the world. We merely need states that will put companies to their place, and start doing stuff for the nation rather than sabotaging itself for the benefit of a few.
Which lead to the insidious and toxic idea of liberalism that it’s impossible, governments will always be corrupted. It’s wrong, and this idea only serve capitalism and liberlism. A powerful state is the only solution to fight these parasites.
But fighting the liberal mindset and the idea that the government is the problem is a difficult fight that no super hero can fight.
Sorry, but you got that totally backwards (liberalism only has is half-way backwards). A powerful state is what makes it possible for these companies to exists and do the damage they do. They are nearly interchangeable with the state, and the further down a state goes towards fascism the more true this becomes.
And how would the absence of state allow to fight these rich people and companies?
Explaining this is out of scope of this community… but currently it is the police that is protecting these companies and the courts that are jailing activists. If you think the state is (or even can be) on our side, you are gravely mistaken.
I firmly disagree. No state merely means a feudal state in my opinion, with the rich and companies being the lords. You can’t prevent them from seizing and enslaving places and people without a strong authority to rule them.
Then, making a state work for the people rather than the companies is another matter.
Unless you can somehow make a state hold itself accountable for its actions I don’t see that we’ll ever get a state that works for the people. Of course there’s a spectrum with some states worse than others, but to have to constantly fight off authoritarian structures who want more power over you shouldn’t be the norm.
That’s what democracy is trying to do.
On the other hand, as I said, no state means a feudal state. If rich men or organisation are not reigned in some way, they will seize the power for themselves. It is actually what’s happening in liberal countries.
With more cynism it is how societies work: an armed group seize a place for its profit or comfort. Until it’s submitted to a more powerful armed group. Democracy arise when the armed group want peace from the people under its rule. Or when the people are the biggest part of the army and get to organise themselves to take over.