Friday, September 25, 2009
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Image Problems for the Animal Rights Community
Let's start this off with a question. What do you see when you picture a person who has animal rights sympathies and environmental concerns? If you answered a person who wears Birkenstocks,Buys local and Organic, and lives in an exclusive neighborhood, then you're not alone. This is a major problem for the animal rights community as a whole because many working class vegans feel alienated and alone. They have good reason to feel this way too because if you work in a factory and you say to your fellow workers that you're vegan, more than likely they'll laugh and tell you that shit's for rich folks. The truth is that many vegans are actually working class folks who work hard in the movement, but who get put to the side in favor of more monied people.
In order for this movement to grow, I think it is imperative that we put the working class at the forefront of this movement. we can no longer rely on celebrities and monied people to carry this movement home. Furthermore, we do a great disservice to those who are working class by not making them feel welcome. If you have a prop on the ballot for example, the obvious way to get this prop passed in many states is to show that the working class is on your side. Without them, you're prop fails horribly. Many people hate it when rich white celebrities go on the air to talk to them them, or sometimes even talk down to them, about animal issues. However if a person from a GM plant went on a comercial and talked about the wrongs of eating meat, for example, many people might think of this as more than a rich white issue and one that involves actual life.
Some of you are probably like "yeah well how do we get by the cost issue?". Good question, but one that isn't an impossible thing to do. For example, we could publish more vegan books for the working class. Show them that Veganism isn't all about fancy foods. For example I can make tofu scramble for 2 people with pretty much whatever I have in my pantry and both will love it. This isn't rocket science and it's high time we get on board with showing people how cheap vegan food can actually be.
Remember, image is everything in politics and in order to move this movement forward we need to adopt a new image. The working class image will make much more headway than our current image we have now.
In order for this movement to grow, I think it is imperative that we put the working class at the forefront of this movement. we can no longer rely on celebrities and monied people to carry this movement home. Furthermore, we do a great disservice to those who are working class by not making them feel welcome. If you have a prop on the ballot for example, the obvious way to get this prop passed in many states is to show that the working class is on your side. Without them, you're prop fails horribly. Many people hate it when rich white celebrities go on the air to talk to them them, or sometimes even talk down to them, about animal issues. However if a person from a GM plant went on a comercial and talked about the wrongs of eating meat, for example, many people might think of this as more than a rich white issue and one that involves actual life.
Some of you are probably like "yeah well how do we get by the cost issue?". Good question, but one that isn't an impossible thing to do. For example, we could publish more vegan books for the working class. Show them that Veganism isn't all about fancy foods. For example I can make tofu scramble for 2 people with pretty much whatever I have in my pantry and both will love it. This isn't rocket science and it's high time we get on board with showing people how cheap vegan food can actually be.
Remember, image is everything in politics and in order to move this movement forward we need to adopt a new image. The working class image will make much more headway than our current image we have now.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Aid,trade policies and ways to solve it.
Picture this, A village in a developing nation has serious hunger problems. They are desperate for any kind of help at all. In steps a western celebrity who helps an "aid" group give that village free food. Now this village is stuffed and has a surplus of food. Everybody is happy, right?
Wrong. That free food just caused a farmer to incur high debts because of the lack of sales from his crops. I mean who can compete with free food? Imagine you set up shop in the middle of Las Vegas selling gambling machines at $1,000 a machine and you're going along just fine until every other competitor starts giving them away. Who's going to buy your machines? Nobody. So you lower your prices to extreme levels and finally you're losing money and incurring high debt from the government. This is exactly what happens to that 3rd world farmer who gets bumrushed by free food. While it's great for the rich farmers of the developed world, it's horrible for the guy in Congo who now has to either totally re-think his farming methods and try and plant new crops or just go out of business.
Won't people starve if they don't get the food they need? Well, the answer is no shit sherlock, this was never in question. What was in question is why we need to dump 1st world products on 3rd world people. The answer is we don't. Many countries were extremely self-sufficient using government policies to feed their own people. For example, Haiti was once a self-sufficient country. Now they import over 80% of their rice. What was once a country that produced nearly all of its rice, now imports 4/5ths of its rice. Why is this, you might ask? Well Haiti was forced to cut import tariffs from a grand whopping 50% to just 3%. 3%! Obviously this is going to lead to massive importations of rice which would then lower the cost of locally produced rice and ultimately cutting off local rice production period. So onto the solutions......
First of all we need to stop making trade a zero-sum game. You wonder why the leftists think of it as a zero-sum game? Well look above. When you try and force other countries to open their markets, you should give in return. fruthermore free trade should actually be fucking free. This means no subsidizing your rice as you won't allow that for other nations. Then we must get onto the fact that when countries are in crisis, we should always try and help, but make sure you're stimulating the local economy over Iowa's economy. Buy rice from the locals and give it to the people in need. pretty fucking simple, no? How does it make any sense to buy foreign food to help the local economy? This is as fucked up as when you hire foreign corporations to build schools in Iraq. HIRE LOCAL WORKERS FOR FUCKS SAKE! If the goal is to allieviate poverty while also stimulating the local economy, then these 2 simple solutions will go a long way in doing that.
Wrong. That free food just caused a farmer to incur high debts because of the lack of sales from his crops. I mean who can compete with free food? Imagine you set up shop in the middle of Las Vegas selling gambling machines at $1,000 a machine and you're going along just fine until every other competitor starts giving them away. Who's going to buy your machines? Nobody. So you lower your prices to extreme levels and finally you're losing money and incurring high debt from the government. This is exactly what happens to that 3rd world farmer who gets bumrushed by free food. While it's great for the rich farmers of the developed world, it's horrible for the guy in Congo who now has to either totally re-think his farming methods and try and plant new crops or just go out of business.
Won't people starve if they don't get the food they need? Well, the answer is no shit sherlock, this was never in question. What was in question is why we need to dump 1st world products on 3rd world people. The answer is we don't. Many countries were extremely self-sufficient using government policies to feed their own people. For example, Haiti was once a self-sufficient country. Now they import over 80% of their rice. What was once a country that produced nearly all of its rice, now imports 4/5ths of its rice. Why is this, you might ask? Well Haiti was forced to cut import tariffs from a grand whopping 50% to just 3%. 3%! Obviously this is going to lead to massive importations of rice which would then lower the cost of locally produced rice and ultimately cutting off local rice production period. So onto the solutions......
First of all we need to stop making trade a zero-sum game. You wonder why the leftists think of it as a zero-sum game? Well look above. When you try and force other countries to open their markets, you should give in return. fruthermore free trade should actually be fucking free. This means no subsidizing your rice as you won't allow that for other nations. Then we must get onto the fact that when countries are in crisis, we should always try and help, but make sure you're stimulating the local economy over Iowa's economy. Buy rice from the locals and give it to the people in need. pretty fucking simple, no? How does it make any sense to buy foreign food to help the local economy? This is as fucked up as when you hire foreign corporations to build schools in Iraq. HIRE LOCAL WORKERS FOR FUCKS SAKE! If the goal is to allieviate poverty while also stimulating the local economy, then these 2 simple solutions will go a long way in doing that.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Anarcho-Communism and it's failures
A short while ago, I used to be an anarchist communist. This meant I believed in mutual aid and stuff being distributed based on need. This belief clouded my judgement for years until I found syndicalism and economics as a whole. This blog will hopefully cast down Anarcho communism for the complete and utter failure that it is.
Take what you need
The basis for anarcho-communism is to take what you need from the communal warehouse, but remember only take what you actually need. well this would work as well as my going to the grocery store and only getting that Loaf of bread I went there to get in the first place. In other words nobody just takes what they need, but instead would take what they want because they thought they "needed" it. This is simply human nature. If you only needed a roll of toilet paper, but saw a dozen rolls and you could tehcnically take this, what are you going to do? You're going to take the entire 12 pack. To suggest that we can have open communal warehouses where people jsut take whatever they need and have it work is simply ludicrous to say the least.
Voluntary work
This is another stupid part of Anarcho Communism, the theory that people would "voluntarily" work for the benefit of society and themselves. Oh yes, can't you see it's capitalism that inhibits us to be our true cooperative selves. I mean one day you have capitalism and with it's abolition the very next day you would all simply go to work for free for societies benefit. It works like magic. actually it works like utter shit. The reality is that maybe 5% of the population would work for free while the other 95% would sit there and reap the rewards. People need an incentive to work. People aren't going to give up all they learned just witht he abolition of capitalism, but will instead progress towards solidarity. It would be downright genocidal to go straight to voluntary work from capitalism as nobody would work and people would literally starve to death while our councils sat there and didn't know what to do. To suggest otherwise is to ignore human nature.
Conclusion
The simple fact is that if we are to ever get to a stage like this, we would need to first go through syndicalism and then build up solidarity among the masses. Even then, it is of my opinion that this would never work even if solidarity is recognized by the people. Anarcho-communism simply doesn't work economically either. You would have large shortages and stuff people need and you would be forced to go towards syndicalism either way. anarcho communists must be more realistic and work witht eh syndicalists as that's the only viable alternative to capitalism. Work should be a right and duty for all as Abraham Guillen once said. Towards syndicalism and away with anarchist communism!
Take what you need
The basis for anarcho-communism is to take what you need from the communal warehouse, but remember only take what you actually need. well this would work as well as my going to the grocery store and only getting that Loaf of bread I went there to get in the first place. In other words nobody just takes what they need, but instead would take what they want because they thought they "needed" it. This is simply human nature. If you only needed a roll of toilet paper, but saw a dozen rolls and you could tehcnically take this, what are you going to do? You're going to take the entire 12 pack. To suggest that we can have open communal warehouses where people jsut take whatever they need and have it work is simply ludicrous to say the least.
Voluntary work
This is another stupid part of Anarcho Communism, the theory that people would "voluntarily" work for the benefit of society and themselves. Oh yes, can't you see it's capitalism that inhibits us to be our true cooperative selves. I mean one day you have capitalism and with it's abolition the very next day you would all simply go to work for free for societies benefit. It works like magic. actually it works like utter shit. The reality is that maybe 5% of the population would work for free while the other 95% would sit there and reap the rewards. People need an incentive to work. People aren't going to give up all they learned just witht he abolition of capitalism, but will instead progress towards solidarity. It would be downright genocidal to go straight to voluntary work from capitalism as nobody would work and people would literally starve to death while our councils sat there and didn't know what to do. To suggest otherwise is to ignore human nature.
Conclusion
The simple fact is that if we are to ever get to a stage like this, we would need to first go through syndicalism and then build up solidarity among the masses. Even then, it is of my opinion that this would never work even if solidarity is recognized by the people. Anarcho-communism simply doesn't work economically either. You would have large shortages and stuff people need and you would be forced to go towards syndicalism either way. anarcho communists must be more realistic and work witht eh syndicalists as that's the only viable alternative to capitalism. Work should be a right and duty for all as Abraham Guillen once said. Towards syndicalism and away with anarchist communism!
Monday, April 20, 2009
Away from Black Blocs and into Economic Development
It seems as though every anarchist is centered on black bloccing as a way to develop the movement. Every protest is created around this form of protest and everywhere people plan for the next black bloc. This has me worried for a variety of reasons. Protesting alone can't solve it and neither can escapism. Protests have never really done much at all. It was the devlopment before and after the protest that created the lasting change. And this is where we need to head.
Anarchism must move away from simply protesting in the streets to a multi-facet approach. Sure, we need to protest and even violently if that's what's necessary, but to simply rely on direct action kills movements of all kinds.
One way I think we need to head is towards economics and the development of unions and getting people out of poverty using ourselves and not the state. The AFL-CIO type unions have a stranglehold on everybody who even thinks of the word union. Unions must go away from leadership positions to democraticly operated organizations. A good way to do this, is to start from the bottom and work your way up. This would mean start at low-level jobs(Fast food being an example) and then work towards higher paying jobs. Once this is established then we need to organize by trade, but keep every union separate from the others. In other words no more vague painting of the brush demands for an entire trade because every corporation is different and that needs to be taken into account.
The economics aspect of things needs to involve a mixture of complimentary currencies, the building of community gardens and of course building of communitites for the extremely poor. First onto the currencies. Complimentary currencies can be used to build solidarity and also to build economic independence. One way to do this, is to have people volunteer at a workplace(Pick anything) and then give them a time note or whatever you want to call it for each hour volunteered. This person then can buy labor from another person for a set price determined by the individuals and then he uses it for whatever reason he decides. This not only personalizes the labor, but also gives people a chance to work together. Only a few cities in the country have this going for them and we need to have every city have a complimentary currency.
Community gardens are also a must. People in lower income communities rarely have access to fresh foods. Many rely on corner stores for their meals. This promotes unhealthy eating habits and it's a cause as to why many lower income people are overweight. Community gardens can help this problem by providing for free fresh veggies and fruits so that they can make themselves a nice balanced meal. In fact, I believe that the goal should be to build farms for cities, like the south central farm. Promoting healthy eating is a must and it's also a way to fuck with big box fast food because people may start to eat in-house instead of eating out.
Poorer communities seem to have a huge homeless problem and the best way to deal with this is to provide them with a safe place to sleep at night. Since many shelters are jam packed, it's best to build tent cities. This is also a way to build solidarity. If a tent city is run by those who sleep in it, then it also builds democracy skills which is crucial to anarchism. In Las Vegas, there is over 13,000 people on the streets and most shelters are full, the tent cities have been shut down, but we must build them again and even get a permit for them. To do this, we would probably have to buy an empty lot, but I believe it's well worth it. We musn't let people sleep on the streets, when they can live in communities that are democratically run.
All of this and more is what's needed. Enough of talking about what you hate, and more doing what you believe in.
Anarchism must move away from simply protesting in the streets to a multi-facet approach. Sure, we need to protest and even violently if that's what's necessary, but to simply rely on direct action kills movements of all kinds.
One way I think we need to head is towards economics and the development of unions and getting people out of poverty using ourselves and not the state. The AFL-CIO type unions have a stranglehold on everybody who even thinks of the word union. Unions must go away from leadership positions to democraticly operated organizations. A good way to do this, is to start from the bottom and work your way up. This would mean start at low-level jobs(Fast food being an example) and then work towards higher paying jobs. Once this is established then we need to organize by trade, but keep every union separate from the others. In other words no more vague painting of the brush demands for an entire trade because every corporation is different and that needs to be taken into account.
The economics aspect of things needs to involve a mixture of complimentary currencies, the building of community gardens and of course building of communitites for the extremely poor. First onto the currencies. Complimentary currencies can be used to build solidarity and also to build economic independence. One way to do this, is to have people volunteer at a workplace(Pick anything) and then give them a time note or whatever you want to call it for each hour volunteered. This person then can buy labor from another person for a set price determined by the individuals and then he uses it for whatever reason he decides. This not only personalizes the labor, but also gives people a chance to work together. Only a few cities in the country have this going for them and we need to have every city have a complimentary currency.
Community gardens are also a must. People in lower income communities rarely have access to fresh foods. Many rely on corner stores for their meals. This promotes unhealthy eating habits and it's a cause as to why many lower income people are overweight. Community gardens can help this problem by providing for free fresh veggies and fruits so that they can make themselves a nice balanced meal. In fact, I believe that the goal should be to build farms for cities, like the south central farm. Promoting healthy eating is a must and it's also a way to fuck with big box fast food because people may start to eat in-house instead of eating out.
Poorer communities seem to have a huge homeless problem and the best way to deal with this is to provide them with a safe place to sleep at night. Since many shelters are jam packed, it's best to build tent cities. This is also a way to build solidarity. If a tent city is run by those who sleep in it, then it also builds democracy skills which is crucial to anarchism. In Las Vegas, there is over 13,000 people on the streets and most shelters are full, the tent cities have been shut down, but we must build them again and even get a permit for them. To do this, we would probably have to buy an empty lot, but I believe it's well worth it. We musn't let people sleep on the streets, when they can live in communities that are democratically run.
All of this and more is what's needed. Enough of talking about what you hate, and more doing what you believe in.
Monday, April 13, 2009
Property and Community
Recently I've been thinking about the issue of property and what should happen to it if it hasn't been used in awhile. Obviously squatting is a big issue for me, but I wanted to think about more than just squatting out buildings. However, I've also been thinking of all the great uses rusted out buildings can provide for the community.
How many of us have been walking down the street, looking around and then seeing this really old building that hasn't been used in years? I'm guessing it's alot of people. Could you imagine if this building was transformed into a democratic homeless shelter run by the homeless for the homeless? Imagine if that weeded out lot on a street was a community garden for low income peoples? Imagine that mile long GM building in Detroit being used for a community recreation center run by members of the community? All of these things can happen. However.....
Some people think that property is a right in this country and that we shouldn't trespass on others' property. Basically it doesn't matter if the community can use it, the property was bought and therefore it should be either sold or if the owner wants, it should sit there until it can be used. Screw that line of thinking. I say we demand a new law, a revolutionary law, that if a piece of property hasn't been used in 6 months, a person should be able to transform it. This law should be nationwide and all anybody should have to do is request that such and such property be used by the community so that the council can give that person to go-ahead to use it. There is simply too many homeless and too few community centers in this country to let buildings get rusted out. Some cities do indeed have this law, but every city,state whatever should have it.
Property back to the people for community use!
How many of us have been walking down the street, looking around and then seeing this really old building that hasn't been used in years? I'm guessing it's alot of people. Could you imagine if this building was transformed into a democratic homeless shelter run by the homeless for the homeless? Imagine if that weeded out lot on a street was a community garden for low income peoples? Imagine that mile long GM building in Detroit being used for a community recreation center run by members of the community? All of these things can happen. However.....
Some people think that property is a right in this country and that we shouldn't trespass on others' property. Basically it doesn't matter if the community can use it, the property was bought and therefore it should be either sold or if the owner wants, it should sit there until it can be used. Screw that line of thinking. I say we demand a new law, a revolutionary law, that if a piece of property hasn't been used in 6 months, a person should be able to transform it. This law should be nationwide and all anybody should have to do is request that such and such property be used by the community so that the council can give that person to go-ahead to use it. There is simply too many homeless and too few community centers in this country to let buildings get rusted out. Some cities do indeed have this law, but every city,state whatever should have it.
Property back to the people for community use!
Friday, April 10, 2009
War Without End
So Obama has asked for another $83BN for funding in Afghanistan and the left is rightfully angry at this. It seems as though he's going to throw all his eggs in one basket like Bush did. Bush is pretty recent history I would think and for Obama to ignore his failure is complete stupidity. We might have upwards of 70,000+ troops in Afghanistan by the end of next year. That's a huge number and history has shown that anybody who puts their eggs in the Afghan basket comes out with not only no eggs, but no basket as well. The Soviets went into Afghanistan to "liberate" them and they came back with a beating almost equal to the Vietnamese beating the US took. When you make this argument to some Americans, they come up with "Well we're not trying to govern them" or something to that extent. It doesn't matter what official US policy is, all that matters to the Afghan people is that it looks like we're trying to run their lives and they won't like it.
Alot of people bring up the fact that they might attack us again if we don't fight them there. "How would you fight terrorism then?" is the question that gets asked to those that want all US troops out of the middle east. The start has to be to withdraw all US troops from that part of the world. If you do that, you cut recruit numbers down to the bare bones. Then you must work with the middle east in dealing with their economic problems. The oil states in that country have a much higher GDP than most of the other states combined even though the oil states have a population of around 14 million. Poverty breeds insurgents and when you create a fairer economy for all of the middle east then you would have a much less likely chance of encountering terrorims in the west. The 3rd thing we could do is to get a real solution to the Palestine/Israel crisis. No more defending Israel no matter what they do. We need to work with both Hamas and the PA to work out solutions. A 2 state solution is key for a lasting peace in that specific part of the middle east. It also wopuldn't hurt to work on peace agreement with Hizbullah and Syria. With the recent election of Netanyahu though, this will be extremely difficult, but certainly workable for somebody with the Diplomatic skills of Clinton and it would seem Obama. The last thing we need to do is to work with Iran on issues that we both agree on. Nobody wants terrorims on their front doorstep and Iran has shown a willingness in the past to help the US work out problems in the middle east. If we can find common ground with the Iranians and give them a powerful role in the middle east, peacefully of course, then we might finally see some great Iranian work being done in that region. I don't like Achminejad as much as the next guy, but we must work with enemies as well as allies.
If we can doo all of these things and more, we can see a peaceful solution to middle eastern problems and finally eradicate or nearly eradicate Fundementalism. We must stop kissing ass to the Israelis and Saudis as they have done us no good in that region. Our enemies now, can most certainly be allies of the future if we play our cards right.
Alot of people bring up the fact that they might attack us again if we don't fight them there. "How would you fight terrorism then?" is the question that gets asked to those that want all US troops out of the middle east. The start has to be to withdraw all US troops from that part of the world. If you do that, you cut recruit numbers down to the bare bones. Then you must work with the middle east in dealing with their economic problems. The oil states in that country have a much higher GDP than most of the other states combined even though the oil states have a population of around 14 million. Poverty breeds insurgents and when you create a fairer economy for all of the middle east then you would have a much less likely chance of encountering terrorims in the west. The 3rd thing we could do is to get a real solution to the Palestine/Israel crisis. No more defending Israel no matter what they do. We need to work with both Hamas and the PA to work out solutions. A 2 state solution is key for a lasting peace in that specific part of the middle east. It also wopuldn't hurt to work on peace agreement with Hizbullah and Syria. With the recent election of Netanyahu though, this will be extremely difficult, but certainly workable for somebody with the Diplomatic skills of Clinton and it would seem Obama. The last thing we need to do is to work with Iran on issues that we both agree on. Nobody wants terrorims on their front doorstep and Iran has shown a willingness in the past to help the US work out problems in the middle east. If we can find common ground with the Iranians and give them a powerful role in the middle east, peacefully of course, then we might finally see some great Iranian work being done in that region. I don't like Achminejad as much as the next guy, but we must work with enemies as well as allies.
If we can doo all of these things and more, we can see a peaceful solution to middle eastern problems and finally eradicate or nearly eradicate Fundementalism. We must stop kissing ass to the Israelis and Saudis as they have done us no good in that region. Our enemies now, can most certainly be allies of the future if we play our cards right.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)