this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2024
-27 points (27.9% liked)

Anarchism and Social Ecology

1355 readers
62 users here now

!anarchism@slrpnk.net

A community about anarchy. anarchism, social ecology, and communalism for SLRPNK! Solarpunk anarchists unite!

Feel free to ask questions here. We aspire to make this space a safe space. SLRPNK.net's basic rules apply here, but generally don't be a dick and don't be an authoritarian.

Anarchism

Anarchism is a social and political theory and practice that works for a free society without domination and hierarchy.

Social Ecology

Social Ecology, developed from green anarchism, is the idea that our ecological problems have their ultimate roots in our social problems. This is because the domination of nature and our ecology by humanity has its ultimate roots in the domination humanity by humans. Therefore, the solutions to our ecological problems are found by addressing our social and ecological problems simultaneously.

Libraries

Audiobooks

Quotes

Poetry and imagination must be integrated with science and technology, for we have evolved beyond an innocence that can be nourished exclusively by myths and dreams.

~ Murray Bookchin, The Ecology of Freedom

People want to treat ‘we’ll figure it out by working to get there’ as some sort of rhetorical evasion instead of being a fundamental expression of trust in the power of conscious collective effort.

~Anonymous, but quoted by Mariame Kaba, We Do This 'Til We Free Us

The end justifies the means. But what if there never is an end? All we have is means.

~Ursula K. Le Guin, The Lathe of Heaven

The assumption that what currently exists must necessarily exist is the acid that corrodes all visionary thinking.

~Murray Bookchin, "A Politics for the Twenty-First Century"

There can be no separation of the revolutionary process from the revolutionary goal. A society based on self-administration must be achieved by means of self-administration.

~Murray Bookchin, Post Scarcity Anarchism

In modern times humans have become a wolf not only to humans, but to all nature.

~Abdullah Öcalan

The ecological question is fundamentally solved as the system is repressed and a socialist social system develops. That does not mean you cannot do something for the environment right away. On the contrary, it is necessary to combine the fight for the environment with the struggle for a general social revolution...

~Abdullah Öcalan

Social ecology advances a message that calls not only for a society free of hierarchy and hierarchical sensibilities, but for an ethics that places humanity in the natural world as an agent for rendering evolution social and natural fully self-conscious.

~ Murray Bookchin

Network

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
-27
submitted 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) by mambabasa to c/anarchism
 

BEFORE YOU DOWNVOTE LIKE SHEEPLE, READ THE ARTICLE FIRST AND THEN COMMENT WHY YOU DISAGREE, THEN, AND ONLY THEN, OUGHT YOU DOWNVOTE

We don’t dismiss the reality that, on the scale of U.S. settler colonial violence, even the slightest degree of harm can mean life or death for those most vulnerable. What we assert here is that the entire notion of “voting as harm reduction” obscures and perpetuates settler-colonial violence, there is nothing “less harmful” about it, and there are more effective ways to intervene in its violences.

all 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] outer_spec@lemmy.blahaj.zone 21 points 9 months ago (1 children)

This article doesn’t say anything that I haven’t already heard people say before. I understand all the points that it is trying to make, and I disagree with all of them.

Also, calling people “sheeple” is not a good way to get them to listen to what you have to say.

[–] drkt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 9 months ago

It wasn't written for outsiders to understand a perspective, it was written as propaganda for the people already inside.

[–] punkisundead 9 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I domt really care if people vote or not, but its really funny how there is always so much discussion around the most liberal way to participate in politics.

Also to those that advocate for voting as one of the ways to influence the world, do you think people should also run for office or actively pursue people to vote for the harm reduction choice? Where do you draw your line and why?

And those that strongly oppose voting, do you think anarchists should burn ballot boxes or atleast more actively disrupt the electoral politics?

[–] mambabasa 6 points 9 months ago

I don't like voting but I do it. I also have no illusions that it is “harm reduction” (it's not in any meaningfull way). I heavily dislike electoral politics and the brazen mediocrity of the liberal opposition, but I wouldn't burn ballot boxes or disrupt elections. What would be the point? It literally doesn't matter since individual votes don't matter.

[–] keepthepace 8 points 9 months ago

When proclamations are made that “voting is harm reduction,” it’s never clear how less harm is actually calculated. Do we compare how many millions of undocumented Indigenous Peoples have been deported? Do we add up what political party conducted more drone strikes? Or who had the highest military budget? Do we factor in pipelines, mines, dams, sacred sites desecration? Do we balance incarceration rates? Do we compare sexual violence statistics? Is it in the massive budgets of politicians who spend hundreds of millions of dollars competing for votes?

Yes, you do that and you get some fucking political culture about the fact the president is not an emperor king and that the control of the congress matters more. You also learn that some policy take years to show some effect and that politicians are specialist about deflecting blame on predecessors while claiming their success.

The immigration/deportation/incarceration policy of the US is a fucking disgrace and it wont be solved overnight, but thinking that the party who calls for the end of the for-profit prison is as bad as the one who pardoned the creation of a racial concentration camp is just dumb. Counting drone strikes but dismissing the fact that without the disastrous GWB presidency there would have been neither the Iraq war nor the Afghanistan war, not the "war on terrorism" idiocy and possibly not even 9/11, that's also voluntarily blinding yourself.

HARM REDUCTION DOES NOT MEAN YOU VOTE TO SUPPORT, IT LITERALLY MEANS YOU VOTE TO OPPOSE!

[–] Maddie@sh.itjust.works 7 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Fuck off with this. If you're American and eligible to vote, and you do anything but vote for Biden this election, you're the fucking problem

[–] mambabasa 3 points 9 months ago

Fuck you asshole. I can't even vote in your stupid election yet I keep hearing shit from y'all. No matter who wins, wall street will continue to plunder my country under the guise of American guns.

[–] unmagical@lemmy.ml 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

If you abstain from voting you indicate that you accept the status quo. If you don't like the 2 party system, vote for a 3rd party, write in your own name, or leave the ballot blank--if enough people take those actions it indicates to those in power that there is displeasure in what is going on.

If you just stay home it indicates that you don't care and are not a threat to their reelection campaigns.

Yes, voting is not the most effective form of participation, but you are not limited to only a single form of action. You can both vote and protest, or vote and participate in mutual aid networks.

There are a lot of people in my mutual aid group that don't vote because they feel it doesn't matter or isn't worth it. But in our extended web there's about 200 people. That's enough to sway some local seats. If you can cook and serve food or distro supplies for several hours each week, you can commit a couple of minutes to fill out a ballot (especially when there's a ballot drop box literally across the street from our distro point).

Also there is no faster way to get me to downvote something than to beg that I not downvote. I'll treat your post on it's merits, and begging for a specific kind of engagement is a no no.

[–] punkisundead 9 points 9 months ago

If you just stay home it indicates that you don't care and are not a threat to their reelection campaigns.

Sorry but its not that simple. Not voting is also often connected to disillusion with the current system or a lack of satisfactory choices. So it absolutely can indicate more than one thing.