This quote is key. Democracy is supposed to be the ways in which we inscribe our shared reality onto the meta-systems that we use to control wider human society. Where do we see this happening today? I argue we simply do not, and in representative systems it is made impossible.

Me peripherally being made aware of wild discourse happening somewhere on the internet.

Damn, interesting!

I am once again thinking about how I need to actually write this essay.

It's this comic from years ago repeated ad nauseum. Climate mitigation is an excuse to make a better world. It pushes us to make radical changes and in the process we could flatten inequality and transform economies from extractive to emancipatory. It's a GOOD excuse!

The problem is not a change from Iowa to Florida, it's from Manila (1.7m people) to an imaginary place that doesn't currently exist where humans can't spend more than a few hours exposed to ambient temperatures because their bodies can't thermoregulate.

Anyone want some more hate watching? lol

The argument from the paper goes "renewables aren't being connected to the grid fast enough so we should use them to mine bitcoin" which honestly is so hilarious it might as well be satire. Oh and 2/3 authors have worked for Shell...

I wrote this abstract for the Anarchist Studies Network conference last year and I never got to actually do any of the work needed to elaborate it because of stupid circumstances, but I still think it's great and a line of thinking sorely in need of development.

Reading some excellent theory on the train to the kick off meeting of the Degrowth project. Acid Horizon have written an amazing manual for understanding how the state and capitalism turn us into individualised and impassive subjects.

Everybody stop what you're doing and read the mushroom at the end of the world by Anna Tsing. If you want to think more clearly about what our social systems need to look like in the coming world it's an absolutely key piece of reading.

I know @ketanjoshi.co has raised this already, but can anyone think of a reason why she would be making videos like this? I think her position is just extreme ecomodernism "innovate out of the problem" and a complete lack of social understanding, but who is she talking to to develop these opinions??

Oh and if you want some more evidence, here she talks about sea level rise calculations with no mention of how complex the calculation of how much water will melt is. This kind of reductionism is why she cannot understand capitalism or economics at all.

And there we have it. The physicist who thinks she can understand climate mitigation and capitalism better than experts thinks pronouns are a problem.

Be careful affording her good faith, her approach to social science is clearly defined by a lack of curiosity and an absolutist ideology.

Anyway, here's the bells in St Paul's because I got to go see them recently and it was very cool. Religion really popped off in some ways, it's a shame the state ruined it.