s_p_l_o_d_e [they/them,he/him]

  • 14 Posts
  • 502 Comments
Joined 4 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 29th, 2020

help-circle



  • I mean, degrowth will definitely happen, either by choice or as a result of just a lack of resources leading to population die-off (from disease, hunger, political instability).

    The problem is that if it doesn't happen through an anti-capitalist revolution (of whichever flavor you prefer 😉), degrowth and scarcity will happen in a bottom up direction, killing the poor etc, until only the wealthy are left clutching their few remaining non-irradiated water tanks and iPhone XXs. (I guess this is why so many tech capitalists are gunning for automation, but even that takes unrenewable energy sources to manufacture/maintain) even solar panels and wind turbines have an operational lifespan of maybe 10ish years

    States are going to contract as a natural consequence of this, maybe artificial borders will exist, but actual state control/functions will continue to focus mainly in the few remaining habitable urban centers, with rural areas becoming increasingly inarable.


  • I mean, it's impossible to ignore that endeavors like the Green New Deal will require a level of extractivism and industrial activity that will not be offset by the "green tech" that it produces .

    Especially since the GND is built with the assumption that ("green") capitalism will be the prevailing economic system on which it relies, while ignoring the environmental damage and loss of human lives in the effort to quickly make up for lost time.

    The only way to truly protect vulnerable populations (and avoid Malthusian arguments of "humans need to accept their fate/reduce the population") from the worst effects of climate change, we really need to lower the standard of living of the most wealthy people (including the majority of middle-class and higher people in developed/industrialized countries) and heavily reduce energy consumption instead of relying on new tech to pretend to solve the problems for us.

    And of course, this requires a complete decoupling from capitalism and market-based economic systems in order to actually work.



  • amen, especially since heavy snowfall/snowstorms often impact power infrastructure, preventing students from accessing remote classes

    there will be attempts to shoehorn remote learning into learning once it's deemed safe to return to in-person learning (regardless of actual health metrics), and when they do stand with your union (or push them) to fight back!


  • one not-completely-shit thing my school does is to openly encourage and allow for students

    • who have difficult home situations
    • having difficulty in remote classes (mostly attendance, often due to depression/isolation and lack of technological access)
    • high-needs or special education requirements

    take their remote classes classes at the school building

    and simultaneously only have admin staff

    • principal
    • department chairs (who aren't teachers)
    • nurses
    • secretaries

    in the building to supervise/support them

    not a perfect solution by any means (students still have to commute to the building, intrinsically unsafe since most of these kids use public transit)

    but the building internet is far more stable than many students' home internet when only a handful of people are using it, and they can get meals there too (no public broadband option in my city, thanks Comcast and Verizon)

    and ofc teachers and students are not required to come into the buildings

    note: sorry for the formatting, I tend to talk in parentheticals a lot