Amidst the rise of surveillance/police states that are no longer just pre-Arab Spring/Classified/Cold War throwbacks (thanks Chelsea Manning) one gets the sense that, as a species, we have gotten no closer to regaining our collective shit than at any point since the Agricultural Revolution. I've become very well acquainted with the sensation of a rapidly accelerating crisis. It's a bit like the Fukushima Daiichi reactor 1 shortly after the tsunami smashed the facilities, when it lay destroyed, creeping by steady degrees out of control... the edifice of control revealed as the folly of unreal maniacs, watched by clueless and frightened idiots, the situation only tempered by the courage and knowledge of those who were once considered alarmist, disposable, and ignorable.
Nobody wants to curb the debilitating spread of convenience consumerism. There is lots of talk. Everyone seems stupefied about the political landscape. We waste our breath to summarize it. Nothing distinguishes our era more than waste. Businesses, governments, and shills are all absolutely overjoyed to be part of a world economy that is premised on the insane principle of unlimited growth on a shrinking planet, of the useless squandering of resources. Profit is king, and governments are its thrall. Moderates are toothless, the countercultures are all dead or miniscule, the relentless march of progress goes on, shitting where we eat and belching poison fumes into the air we breathe. Human potential is squandered and used up at the same rate: who can blame the junkies now? The capitalists stand unchallenged, they who were as evil and soulless as the communist exploiters they reviled and nearly destroyed the world to curb. In the most powerful country in the world, host to the most powerful multinationals you can't even begin to imagine, a corporation is legally equivalent to a person.
The junkies, at least, are honest in their self-destructive pursuits, and probably contribute less to wastage than the respectable classes of citizen-consumers, whose per capita throughput of plastic garbage is enough to bury an entire small property each and every year. Let's not even get into energy or food waste. The wealthy are smug and spit on the middle class, who smugly spit on the working class, who wearily spit on the working poor, who accidentally spit on the destitute. Respect is rarely earned or given to or from any of 'the little people'. Respect is a commodity. Self-interest in the age of individualism has led only to the abandonment of societal and individual progress. Self-denial is less than a relic: it is the ghost of an unheard-of type of human... all else is myth but gratification. We will become lower apes yet, at this pace, while the descendants of humanity spit on us, completing the cycle. Likely they will be too cruel and abstracted to actively exterminate our relict populations.
And in this atmosphere of toxic and vile and inhuman activity, is it really any wonder that cruelty and hatred grow freely? Is it any wonder that laws cannot protect people from themselves, or children from each other? The people who are surprised by the modern world are obviously blind to what it really is. I can't blame anyone for being a junkie, a consumerist whore, or willfully ignorant and distracted (three increasingly similar things) and there are not many who can lay blame for it. What is important is that the entire situation of the world is becoming too alarming, is growing too quickly, and is passing far too quickly out of the hands of common people (you know, the abused slaves and serfs of yesteryear, who stood to gain the most from modernity and progress). With technology as a crutch it is very tempting to see the next generations of humanity as nothing but unnecessary, mentally-truncated cripples ruled by a new aristocracy.
"There is bad, yes, but there is also good in the world." I never declared that hope was dead, I was suggesting that hope itself is currently as endangered as any crumbling, over-harvested species in any pillaged environment. Things like OWS just alienate hope from reality. There are not enough skeptics and too many cynics, but both are outnumbered by shills and apologists. I'd take the world's bitterest cynic over any shill apologist - I prefer honesty to optimism where my entire species, its homeworld, and its livelihood are in question. Nobody has successfully taught the lesson of unity without coercion... true moral and philosophic problems go unanswered while we charge into the minutest details of quantum physics. Values are changing, but you ought to get top value for your dollar. We should take something back, even at this late point, to prove to our doomed descendants that we were not just fickle, feckless, fussy cowards with fine words and utopian ideals.
We are shocked and offended that nature would take anything back that we gleaned from it. Yet, we come from it, and owe our all to it. This is absurd. We consider ourselves entitled to pillage not 'the environment' alone but in fact all of life which we commonly see as nothing but a means to wealth, contentment, and satisfaction. We do not treasure or honor life for its own sake and therefore we will not solve the pathological behaviors behind the ecological and social problems we claim to want to solve. Mostly we have failed to understand nature... we force it into models and theories instead of learning from it. We hate the idea of nature reclaiming its 10% so much that we will stop at no lengths, not even poisoning ourselves, to prevent a weed from growing or an insect from feeding. Meanwhile we make such noise about unborn babies that our callousness in other regards seems schizophrenic.
Why wouldn't I hide in a narcotic haze, or try to buy my way to peace of mind (irony!), or even kill myself? More and more I have no answer, can barely see around myself, and realize that awareness is no substitution for action, for a coherent response to an increasingly incoherent world. It's a pity that radicals are marginalized to the point where they have no alternatives and tiny audiences. It's a pity that the only moderates who are allowed to speak are the ones telling us that we have done no wrong, that we have nothing to regret and a bright future. It's a pity no side in any of the day's big arguments has any respect, any foresight, any capacity to entertain alternative world-views. I guess I should give in, and just passively wait to be subsumed in the coming wave of tech-oligarch globalist worthlessness and wretchedness, into the hopeless and shit hell we deserve, into the ongoing death of the world we barely knew. Lambs for slaughter: I tell you I wouldn't mind being a child again...
Showing posts with label ecocide. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ecocide. Show all posts
8/27/13
The Vat-Grown Future
I can understand the recent hullabaloo about vat-grown beef (even though the price of a few grams is tens of thousands of dollars): the current system used to raise and prepare a majority of beef is equal parts cruel and insane. You don't have to have a soft heart to lament the existence of factory farms and feedlots, unless you're the kind of person who pretends to be a total badass (maybe you were molested as a child, I don't know). If you think making animals stand for hours in ankle deep shit or live entire lives in tiny cages is cool you're probably also a psychopath or at least pro-prison sociopath. Vat-grown meat is a step in the right direction, since the idea of feeding the world with naturally-grown protein is getting to be really, really laughable. Still, it's kind of useless as a solution, and favors the armchair-ethicist over the realist: a counterproductive situation 'progressive movements' are often haunted by.
Fisheries are collapsed, hunting is no longer a way of life for the overwhelming majority, and factory farming is a soulless practice of agribusiness that stains the world in unhealthy shit, diseased blood, novel human/animal illnesses, and misery – not to mention fast food and all associated problems. Anyone who says differently is a corporate shill, an unapologetic ecocidal turd, a Scientific OptimistTM , or plainly ignorant. So, basically, the idea of further separating the populace from its food is the only one that wins out, and few people see the problem with it, as long as it prevents the cruel and bloody deaths of cute animals (which are often not that cute and generally die a sterilized, clinical death after a life of perfect, almost middle-class indolence and occasional active cruelty).
Meanwhile, we could source all of our protein, cheaply and very efficiently, from insects. We can still have a good cut of beef or chicken, but insect protein can cover, say, Monday to Thursday, and cheaply. It is a solution that has been staring us in the face since the dawn of time, but at some point our phobias overruled common sense and we stopped eating bugs. Now, in the 11th hour of a crisis hundreds of years in the making, we have once again proven that we can be smart, but never reasonable.
Easy living has eroded any sense of pragmatism we had, and instead of taking matters into our own hands we have pushed food further into the corporate fold and away from our own hands, which we are generally afraid to get dirty. Ethical neutrality is not worth the price, beyond which lies the fact that agribusiness is not going anywhere. Animals will continue to suffer for as long as they are profitable, agriculture will continue to desiccate and toxify the earth and 'pests', as well as anything nearby or downriver. A small cost to pay to ensure nature doesn't get anything intended for ourselves. But we're not selfish, and thinking otherwise is 'not realistic', sorry. Don't think about the dead lakes and rivers, or the dying oceans. Listen to the greenwashing machine and damn well heed how it is telling you not to worry. Or listen to the deafening silence of pop culture, I mean, who gives a fuck?
Then, when the rape of the earth has eliminated the chance of raising edible animals, food will move completely out of the reach of the populace and into the security of corporate production thanks to research potential generated today. Does it amplify the horror enough to know that not only are living creatures processed into competitively-priced foods, but that the process of raising the animal itself can be bypassed? Or is that ethical, to cut out the animal's contribution, while still eating of its flesh? Even the borderline sadistic systems in place today still have a beating heart, and the symbolic act is still committed, even though shrouded by the mystery of NDA contracts and secure facilities. Needless to say, vat-grown appeals to the people who can't stomach the current model. It stinks, though. If GMOs are freaky frankenfoods then Vat-Grown is undead zombiefood. No double standards.
However, that's life as an omnivorous mammal: you sometimes kill to eat. Then, because of a healthy omnivorous diet which includes hunting and foraging activity, you gain the mental acuity and leisure to reflect on the act of killing. You turn it into an art and thrive. Then, twenty thousand or more years later, you get to the point where the idea has been so over-thought, and the act so over politicized and perverted by industry, that it is no longer palatable or acceptable ('unless you stop worrying and start enjoying!'). Since it is the modern world, and a healthy respect for nature is not an option, the only cure remaining is to develop the technique of growing meat in a bloodless, clinical way, so that it dies apart from any animal, so that the vast stocks of commercial livestock can go into the history books and possibly extinction while we grow our mega cities and hoard terabytes of data per second and eat our ethically sourced protein loaves. The only thing better than eating beef once a week, shutting down most fast food outlets, and finding better sources of living protein is to make an undead mockery of flesh in a lab because we're too infantilized to give up our excesses and face the reality of cost and value.
Madness is what it is. The plan seems to be to abolish the cycle of life or at least further commodify it. Plants are living things that we kill all the time, without seeming to care a bit, and we also gorge ourselves on their sex organs, and that's acceptable – but killing a dog to eat is cruel and/or worthy of mockery? Eating ants, roaches, slugs, spiders... any of the bountiful and varied insect species is crazy, absurd? When the oceans are emptied, the air is full of cow farts, and land covered in pig and chicken shit? Farming insects cheaply, each house producing a few dozen pounds a month, each apartment growing a few pounds, plus enriching soil... no that's crazy. It's as crazy as razing the suburbs and growing traditional food there. What we need, obviously, is bloodless, ethical, lab-grown meat – it's never going to play into corporate or political power fantasies.
There is a parallel to this in drone warfare. Pure logic founded on historical fact (hahahaha) would assume that if a global conflict was not worth risking a soldier's life, it was not a conflict worth engaging in (hahahaha). If it was not popular enough to sustain casualties, it was not popular enough to be conducted by a democracy. But, you see, take out the aggressor's wasted lives, and the populace no longer has the ethical high-ground it is used to enjoying. Now, having made war bloodless for your country (and even more infuriating and hopeless for another) you get to kill with impunity, and the rage you generate can be explained as the unenlightened reaction of religious fanatics. The dissenters, domestic or otherwise, can be explained away as "DISLIKED POLITICAL GROUP" or "BIASED RABBLE ROUSER" while the insane reality of the situation continues to make life unpleasant or untenable for the rest.
"Why drink water when you can have a tasty Coca Cola? Probably because you're a mindless consumer – the New Livestock. Have we got some fantastic new products for you!"
Textual Note:
Hi there, I've been a little shrill, I admit, though I don't apologize for it. If the future of where and how humanity sources its food does not matter to you, you won't understand why I take the tone of alarmism. Obviously the whole thing is a bit sensationalistic... but so is the 'sustainability is for faggots' crowd, who are a bunch of despicable, small-minded wretches. Also, I think I've proven I have a great affinity for hyperbole. But please do remember that there are actual problems and that the future is uncertain, and that the current model of a disinterested public eating food created in a vacuum away from their sight is kind of fucked up, and could be changed for the better. Sorry if it wasn't funny/insightful/verified enough - I admit I am off my game. That is all, thanks for reading as always, and stay true to the game.
Fisheries are collapsed, hunting is no longer a way of life for the overwhelming majority, and factory farming is a soulless practice of agribusiness that stains the world in unhealthy shit, diseased blood, novel human/animal illnesses, and misery – not to mention fast food and all associated problems. Anyone who says differently is a corporate shill, an unapologetic ecocidal turd, a Scientific OptimistTM , or plainly ignorant. So, basically, the idea of further separating the populace from its food is the only one that wins out, and few people see the problem with it, as long as it prevents the cruel and bloody deaths of cute animals (which are often not that cute and generally die a sterilized, clinical death after a life of perfect, almost middle-class indolence and occasional active cruelty).
Meanwhile, we could source all of our protein, cheaply and very efficiently, from insects. We can still have a good cut of beef or chicken, but insect protein can cover, say, Monday to Thursday, and cheaply. It is a solution that has been staring us in the face since the dawn of time, but at some point our phobias overruled common sense and we stopped eating bugs. Now, in the 11th hour of a crisis hundreds of years in the making, we have once again proven that we can be smart, but never reasonable.
Easy living has eroded any sense of pragmatism we had, and instead of taking matters into our own hands we have pushed food further into the corporate fold and away from our own hands, which we are generally afraid to get dirty. Ethical neutrality is not worth the price, beyond which lies the fact that agribusiness is not going anywhere. Animals will continue to suffer for as long as they are profitable, agriculture will continue to desiccate and toxify the earth and 'pests', as well as anything nearby or downriver. A small cost to pay to ensure nature doesn't get anything intended for ourselves. But we're not selfish, and thinking otherwise is 'not realistic', sorry. Don't think about the dead lakes and rivers, or the dying oceans. Listen to the greenwashing machine and damn well heed how it is telling you not to worry. Or listen to the deafening silence of pop culture, I mean, who gives a fuck?
Then, when the rape of the earth has eliminated the chance of raising edible animals, food will move completely out of the reach of the populace and into the security of corporate production thanks to research potential generated today. Does it amplify the horror enough to know that not only are living creatures processed into competitively-priced foods, but that the process of raising the animal itself can be bypassed? Or is that ethical, to cut out the animal's contribution, while still eating of its flesh? Even the borderline sadistic systems in place today still have a beating heart, and the symbolic act is still committed, even though shrouded by the mystery of NDA contracts and secure facilities. Needless to say, vat-grown appeals to the people who can't stomach the current model. It stinks, though. If GMOs are freaky frankenfoods then Vat-Grown is undead zombiefood. No double standards.
However, that's life as an omnivorous mammal: you sometimes kill to eat. Then, because of a healthy omnivorous diet which includes hunting and foraging activity, you gain the mental acuity and leisure to reflect on the act of killing. You turn it into an art and thrive. Then, twenty thousand or more years later, you get to the point where the idea has been so over-thought, and the act so over politicized and perverted by industry, that it is no longer palatable or acceptable ('unless you stop worrying and start enjoying!'). Since it is the modern world, and a healthy respect for nature is not an option, the only cure remaining is to develop the technique of growing meat in a bloodless, clinical way, so that it dies apart from any animal, so that the vast stocks of commercial livestock can go into the history books and possibly extinction while we grow our mega cities and hoard terabytes of data per second and eat our ethically sourced protein loaves. The only thing better than eating beef once a week, shutting down most fast food outlets, and finding better sources of living protein is to make an undead mockery of flesh in a lab because we're too infantilized to give up our excesses and face the reality of cost and value.
Madness is what it is. The plan seems to be to abolish the cycle of life or at least further commodify it. Plants are living things that we kill all the time, without seeming to care a bit, and we also gorge ourselves on their sex organs, and that's acceptable – but killing a dog to eat is cruel and/or worthy of mockery? Eating ants, roaches, slugs, spiders... any of the bountiful and varied insect species is crazy, absurd? When the oceans are emptied, the air is full of cow farts, and land covered in pig and chicken shit? Farming insects cheaply, each house producing a few dozen pounds a month, each apartment growing a few pounds, plus enriching soil... no that's crazy. It's as crazy as razing the suburbs and growing traditional food there. What we need, obviously, is bloodless, ethical, lab-grown meat – it's never going to play into corporate or political power fantasies.
There is a parallel to this in drone warfare. Pure logic founded on historical fact (hahahaha) would assume that if a global conflict was not worth risking a soldier's life, it was not a conflict worth engaging in (hahahaha). If it was not popular enough to sustain casualties, it was not popular enough to be conducted by a democracy. But, you see, take out the aggressor's wasted lives, and the populace no longer has the ethical high-ground it is used to enjoying. Now, having made war bloodless for your country (and even more infuriating and hopeless for another) you get to kill with impunity, and the rage you generate can be explained as the unenlightened reaction of religious fanatics. The dissenters, domestic or otherwise, can be explained away as "DISLIKED POLITICAL GROUP" or "BIASED RABBLE ROUSER" while the insane reality of the situation continues to make life unpleasant or untenable for the rest.
"Why drink water when you can have a tasty Coca Cola? Probably because you're a mindless consumer – the New Livestock. Have we got some fantastic new products for you!"
Textual Note:
Hi there, I've been a little shrill, I admit, though I don't apologize for it. If the future of where and how humanity sources its food does not matter to you, you won't understand why I take the tone of alarmism. Obviously the whole thing is a bit sensationalistic... but so is the 'sustainability is for faggots' crowd, who are a bunch of despicable, small-minded wretches. Also, I think I've proven I have a great affinity for hyperbole. But please do remember that there are actual problems and that the future is uncertain, and that the current model of a disinterested public eating food created in a vacuum away from their sight is kind of fucked up, and could be changed for the better. Sorry if it wasn't funny/insightful/verified enough - I admit I am off my game. That is all, thanks for reading as always, and stay true to the game.
7/7/13
Spit on Apologists or Don't Stop Believing: The Decline of the Middle Ground
Before they kill all of the rest of us. There's been an ongoing crisis for the last ten or so years and you will be hearing about it soon. Anyone who pays attention to nature or depends on it for a living can tell you some things that will make you uneasy. Things that might even get you to rethink your casual, materially-prosperous, entitled and contented life in the Global Consumerist Utopia. Things like the decline of honeybees, songbirds, everything but rats and rodents, it seems. Of course it's all very far away from the sort of stuff the average person cares about, like earning enough to live, or, having succeeded at that, earning enough to prosper.
Yes, I don't mean to be snide or aggressive, but a lot of people in the world are living in a goddamn fantasy. Humanity as a whole is becoming a soulless horde of consumerists and apologists. Everyone remembers the clothing factory collapse in Bangladesh, right? Oh, that's right, it was swept under the rug by the inevitable march of time. But the apologists came out of the woodwork then, to protect the capitalist practices which 'create wealth and jobs' in the third world and 'victories for feminism'. Now, I'm not a card-carrying Feminist so I don't purport to speak for women, but I highly doubt that cheap labor and globalism are victories for women, or anyone besides executives and their slaves.
The scariest thing happening right now, besides the potential dawn of a long era of climate change, or the degradation of the environment, or the dawn of an invincible corpocracy, or even the total fucking of the world by trillion-dollar multinational corporations and their countless parasite offspring, or the emergence of well-funded self-deluded police states, or the fracturing of human society by internet individualism and sub/urban anomie... one of the scariest things happening is the collapse of honeybee populations. Google Colony Collapse Disorder for more information. Or ignore this information and go on running your mouth and taking everything for granted. Believe in the physically impossible unceasing growth of Capitalism.
I think it's one of the great ongoing stories of the last decade. I've been keeping a tally and I've seen exactly two bees in the last few days, and I am fairly sure it was the same bee both times. I have a cherry tree and this year's yield was tiny - probably because of the lack of bees and the fucked-up weather. You rarely hear anything about the bee situation, and you would have had to be paying attention to apply a good narrative to it. To be blunt about it: beehives are dying off, leading to potential food crisis and, worst case scenario, a cascade of extinctions. Lots of great, non-engineered foods are possible only because of the honeybee. Fruits and nuts and anything that eats them is directly endangered. Why? Any number of reasons, but a few are becoming more and more apparent: try agribusiness and their overuse of pesticides (which goes along nicely with the GMO Narrative, a pile of shit I will try to keep out of).
This story is fantastic because two groups of people I despise ignore it (and I'm not talking about the Consumerist Masses, even though they're despicable, dumb, and deranged): the pro-and-anti GMO people. Now, food production is very important in theory and practice. Anything that can feed more people using less land probably a good investment, but there is a bit of the old hubris in the practice of genetic engineering – at least it seems like there is. I'm sure there are good people working there, but good people have been pulled into every evil thing we have ever done as a species – without them the evil ones wouldn't be capable enough.
Hippies are annoying but corporates are just as shitty: and both are largely ignoring the bee crisis. I have no strong opinions on GMO crops, but I hate agribusiness, and I hate Monsanto, like any conscious person with a heartbeat. They always believe in fixing a problem with another problem, and they've never admitted to their faults. Caught in a powerful embrace with world governments, and too rich to be subject to the law, corporations have a mindset analogous to papal infallibility. That alone makes me hate them: they could feed the poor for a million years but there would still be suffering poor. Both sides go wet for politics, but they lose their rabid erections as soon as people insist on the truth.
You could argue agribusiness feeds us, but even in the first world people are going chronically hungry. The food supply is arranged for maximum additives, engineered products, and subsidies. Before food is wasted by the consumer, it is wasted by the restaurant, the supermarket, the factory, the government, or the farmer. People would tell you that this is bullshit spread by fatalistic idealists who don't really know what's happening. People who tell you these things are apologists, and they will also tell you that all is well in the third world, to trust in your local or federal police force, to keep a fixed address, and to make as much money as you possibly can. Because they don't want to be alone, and the people who pay them don't want to fall out of power, and those people you never meet end up with more of your money than you'd think.
I guess the story goes like this: we're humans and we have such big brains. We're so smart: we can't go wrong. We deserve our excesses, and we are close to the Most Prosperous Era in History, when all problems will fade away, but we have to keep believing in the capitalist, empirical, and statist precepts that brought us to this point. No abuse of science cannot be cured by another abuse of science. Nature needs our help. We can improve nature. We are smarter than billions of years. We are more powerful than the seasons. We can do anything. We can solve inequality. We can believe in hope and progress. We can buy anything, even health, even love, even happiness. In 20 years we will construct the first artificial souls. So who gives a fuck about declining bee populations? We can solve that with either more poison or robot bees, and nothing needs to change, and we're going to be alright: I bet you twenty thousand give-a-fuck-points that Monsanto already bought the solution to the problem they, aided by plenty of other short-sighted profiteers, created.
Who gives a fuck about traffic jams? Radioactive contaminants bouncing around for thousands of years, and millions of lifeforms? Who cares about an unstable, overleveraged, dangerous food supply? As long as there's food on the table, nobody will care about this one planet we have that we are pissing away. Think about that when you see some sweaty fuck in a car, getting angry at a traffic jam, burning thousands of units of energy just to be bored and frustrated. Then look at the next one, and so on, and so on, forever. Some day, our hungry and scarce distant descendants will look back to this era and wonder if we were even capable of feeling shame.
Yes, I don't mean to be snide or aggressive, but a lot of people in the world are living in a goddamn fantasy. Humanity as a whole is becoming a soulless horde of consumerists and apologists. Everyone remembers the clothing factory collapse in Bangladesh, right? Oh, that's right, it was swept under the rug by the inevitable march of time. But the apologists came out of the woodwork then, to protect the capitalist practices which 'create wealth and jobs' in the third world and 'victories for feminism'. Now, I'm not a card-carrying Feminist so I don't purport to speak for women, but I highly doubt that cheap labor and globalism are victories for women, or anyone besides executives and their slaves.
The scariest thing happening right now, besides the potential dawn of a long era of climate change, or the degradation of the environment, or the dawn of an invincible corpocracy, or even the total fucking of the world by trillion-dollar multinational corporations and their countless parasite offspring, or the emergence of well-funded self-deluded police states, or the fracturing of human society by internet individualism and sub/urban anomie... one of the scariest things happening is the collapse of honeybee populations. Google Colony Collapse Disorder for more information. Or ignore this information and go on running your mouth and taking everything for granted. Believe in the physically impossible unceasing growth of Capitalism.
I think it's one of the great ongoing stories of the last decade. I've been keeping a tally and I've seen exactly two bees in the last few days, and I am fairly sure it was the same bee both times. I have a cherry tree and this year's yield was tiny - probably because of the lack of bees and the fucked-up weather. You rarely hear anything about the bee situation, and you would have had to be paying attention to apply a good narrative to it. To be blunt about it: beehives are dying off, leading to potential food crisis and, worst case scenario, a cascade of extinctions. Lots of great, non-engineered foods are possible only because of the honeybee. Fruits and nuts and anything that eats them is directly endangered. Why? Any number of reasons, but a few are becoming more and more apparent: try agribusiness and their overuse of pesticides (which goes along nicely with the GMO Narrative, a pile of shit I will try to keep out of).
This story is fantastic because two groups of people I despise ignore it (and I'm not talking about the Consumerist Masses, even though they're despicable, dumb, and deranged): the pro-and-anti GMO people. Now, food production is very important in theory and practice. Anything that can feed more people using less land probably a good investment, but there is a bit of the old hubris in the practice of genetic engineering – at least it seems like there is. I'm sure there are good people working there, but good people have been pulled into every evil thing we have ever done as a species – without them the evil ones wouldn't be capable enough.
Hippies are annoying but corporates are just as shitty: and both are largely ignoring the bee crisis. I have no strong opinions on GMO crops, but I hate agribusiness, and I hate Monsanto, like any conscious person with a heartbeat. They always believe in fixing a problem with another problem, and they've never admitted to their faults. Caught in a powerful embrace with world governments, and too rich to be subject to the law, corporations have a mindset analogous to papal infallibility. That alone makes me hate them: they could feed the poor for a million years but there would still be suffering poor. Both sides go wet for politics, but they lose their rabid erections as soon as people insist on the truth.
You could argue agribusiness feeds us, but even in the first world people are going chronically hungry. The food supply is arranged for maximum additives, engineered products, and subsidies. Before food is wasted by the consumer, it is wasted by the restaurant, the supermarket, the factory, the government, or the farmer. People would tell you that this is bullshit spread by fatalistic idealists who don't really know what's happening. People who tell you these things are apologists, and they will also tell you that all is well in the third world, to trust in your local or federal police force, to keep a fixed address, and to make as much money as you possibly can. Because they don't want to be alone, and the people who pay them don't want to fall out of power, and those people you never meet end up with more of your money than you'd think.
I guess the story goes like this: we're humans and we have such big brains. We're so smart: we can't go wrong. We deserve our excesses, and we are close to the Most Prosperous Era in History, when all problems will fade away, but we have to keep believing in the capitalist, empirical, and statist precepts that brought us to this point. No abuse of science cannot be cured by another abuse of science. Nature needs our help. We can improve nature. We are smarter than billions of years. We are more powerful than the seasons. We can do anything. We can solve inequality. We can believe in hope and progress. We can buy anything, even health, even love, even happiness. In 20 years we will construct the first artificial souls. So who gives a fuck about declining bee populations? We can solve that with either more poison or robot bees, and nothing needs to change, and we're going to be alright: I bet you twenty thousand give-a-fuck-points that Monsanto already bought the solution to the problem they, aided by plenty of other short-sighted profiteers, created.
Who gives a fuck about traffic jams? Radioactive contaminants bouncing around for thousands of years, and millions of lifeforms? Who cares about an unstable, overleveraged, dangerous food supply? As long as there's food on the table, nobody will care about this one planet we have that we are pissing away. Think about that when you see some sweaty fuck in a car, getting angry at a traffic jam, burning thousands of units of energy just to be bored and frustrated. Then look at the next one, and so on, and so on, forever. Some day, our hungry and scarce distant descendants will look back to this era and wonder if we were even capable of feeling shame.
10/18/12
Bookishness Reloaded
50 Shades of Grey and its ilk have been on the bestseller lists all year. Really long now and I'm wondering about it. They've basically made it a place for them to hang out. I don't know how any serious watchers of the bestseller list feel about it. I don't even know if there are serious watchers of the bestseller lists. I suppose, ultimately, there should be a few, and none of them should be surprised by what generally hangs out there. Not that there's anything inherently wrong with what hangs out there.
The whole 50 Shades debacle is the latest of an entire series of its kind. The ecosystem of modern publishing doesn't strike one as exclusively healthy – but there's nothing wrong with it, per se. Or so one thinks, ultimately the nonfiction lists aren't really super hopeful either. But there's also sometimes interesting stuff. Whether or not it's brewed by committee, exploits the zeitgeist, and has 'buzz' and 'word of mouth' and 'traction' are the great indicators of sales. Commercial success nullifies critical success and proves the naysayers wrong, inept, and out of touch. Or it should/might/doesn't, depending on how you feel about unlimited free market, incorporated.
The funny thing is, in this era dictionaries have actually created entries on mots célèbre that have no longevity or ultimate worth. I'm looking at you, 'frenemy'. The news crowed joyously about frenemy and friends getting into Webster and Oxford for the better part of a week, probably more than 12 months ago now. What increases the hilarity factor is that the conservative book set (most publishers, consumers, etc) actually sees the potential for twitter literature as a good thing. They might shit if it was considered to switch to a pure paperless market (which is sort of a scary idea when one considers it), but they will fill their own pages with the sort of meaningless colloquial twaddle that has no fundamental role in language. The white noise of language and of literature, and the much hyped 'echo chamber' effect of Twitter is involved somehow. Publishers bank on books that are too big to fail and they go to town whenever some book becomes so important that everyone needs a copy right now. They aim to remain relevant as opposed to fundamental. Language skills and general output are fucked enough without a neoliberal approach to neologisms.
So if you really think about the situation as it stands, the publishing ecosystem is a bit like every other large-scale market ecosystem: some smaller companies, independent organizations, and identities cling to the vestiges with varying success; by and large it consists of gigantic entities producing essentially a monoculture. So what? The incredible size and awesome power of these entities is something that should inspire us, their offerings are delivered with unthinkable force to vast numbers, on a scale that was relatively recently unthinkable. This is no minor business, even this allegedly 'dying' publishing industry.
There exists more written word than can be reliably processed by any one person. This condition is hardly new or revelatory, but it seems worth mentioning no matter how many thousands of years it's been true. Seeing as the human world still exists, and written word is still very essential to its development and even survival, the immense pile of written work should not merely be considered refuse. Some of it obviously stinks, but it's necessary.
Still. At this advanced stage the offerings aren't always on the level. The fact that one book hangs onto a bestseller list for months, in one country, means that not enough books are being shared, or that the market isn't dynamic enough, or anything because its actual value cannot be the ultimate monetary sum represented by its time on the bestseller lists. All of which is beside the point, I know.
The whole 50 Shades debacle is the latest of an entire series of its kind. The ecosystem of modern publishing doesn't strike one as exclusively healthy – but there's nothing wrong with it, per se. Or so one thinks, ultimately the nonfiction lists aren't really super hopeful either. But there's also sometimes interesting stuff. Whether or not it's brewed by committee, exploits the zeitgeist, and has 'buzz' and 'word of mouth' and 'traction' are the great indicators of sales. Commercial success nullifies critical success and proves the naysayers wrong, inept, and out of touch. Or it should/might/doesn't, depending on how you feel about unlimited free market, incorporated.
The funny thing is, in this era dictionaries have actually created entries on mots célèbre that have no longevity or ultimate worth. I'm looking at you, 'frenemy'. The news crowed joyously about frenemy and friends getting into Webster and Oxford for the better part of a week, probably more than 12 months ago now. What increases the hilarity factor is that the conservative book set (most publishers, consumers, etc) actually sees the potential for twitter literature as a good thing. They might shit if it was considered to switch to a pure paperless market (which is sort of a scary idea when one considers it), but they will fill their own pages with the sort of meaningless colloquial twaddle that has no fundamental role in language. The white noise of language and of literature, and the much hyped 'echo chamber' effect of Twitter is involved somehow. Publishers bank on books that are too big to fail and they go to town whenever some book becomes so important that everyone needs a copy right now. They aim to remain relevant as opposed to fundamental. Language skills and general output are fucked enough without a neoliberal approach to neologisms.
So if you really think about the situation as it stands, the publishing ecosystem is a bit like every other large-scale market ecosystem: some smaller companies, independent organizations, and identities cling to the vestiges with varying success; by and large it consists of gigantic entities producing essentially a monoculture. So what? The incredible size and awesome power of these entities is something that should inspire us, their offerings are delivered with unthinkable force to vast numbers, on a scale that was relatively recently unthinkable. This is no minor business, even this allegedly 'dying' publishing industry.
There exists more written word than can be reliably processed by any one person. This condition is hardly new or revelatory, but it seems worth mentioning no matter how many thousands of years it's been true. Seeing as the human world still exists, and written word is still very essential to its development and even survival, the immense pile of written work should not merely be considered refuse. Some of it obviously stinks, but it's necessary.
Still. At this advanced stage the offerings aren't always on the level. The fact that one book hangs onto a bestseller list for months, in one country, means that not enough books are being shared, or that the market isn't dynamic enough, or anything because its actual value cannot be the ultimate monetary sum represented by its time on the bestseller lists. All of which is beside the point, I know.
8/25/12
Deleted Reply to Facebook 'Ecocide Prevention' Status
It's too late to prevent ecocide. Fisheries are depleted, global ecologies are unbalanced and in disarray, and fracking will ruin whatever clean, mass available groundwater North America has left. The Rest are being exploited without any consideration for the future by the global plutocrat class and their lackeys. The oceans are dead zones compared to what they were an hundred years ago and anyone telling you different is trying to catch the remaining 10%, even octopi are becoming social pack animals under the pressure, and cephalopods are not social creatures. In a few thousand years they will crawl from the sickened seas and destroy the traces of our weakened civilization. Apes are in decline and we were the best of them.
Hicks will go on telling you the water's worth drinking while they accumulate gargantuan tumors public healthcare will have to pay for. Special interests will keep on telling you that anyone opposed to exploitation is a communist, radical feminist, or pathological environmentalist liar. Oil is reckless. Car culture is stupid. Earth is under intensive, exploitative attack for the last hundred years in the name of a flawed standard of living that nobody in the West will give up without a fight. Everyone who isn't already suffering from pollution-induced disease has been fooled and when cancer and dementia peak we'll be out of any legacy money and forced to die in the streets like forgetful, hateful animals, drinking plastic leachate garbage water from the sixties, estrogen refuse from the sexual revolution, and antidepressant pollutants from the 80's. We will feel nothing as we decline. Nobody in the west has given up on waste. Waste is killing our chances of survivability. Our weakness is killing our remaining odds. Consumerism is a rampaging lion with no serious opponents.
We fucked ourselves and being hippies is not an answer. We are going to pay for our complacency and the nature nuts will smirk at our dependent corpses and rotting cities, no matter how righteous we feel for being consumers. Then they, too, will succumb to the poison. And life will continue without us, thinking "good riddance". So go out and protest and go home, drive to the gym, and feel like a good person. You are just another sellout caught in a bad deal, another animal caught in the natural process of population peak and decline. Your impotent fury at the truth, or lack of truth, will not outlive the diseases waiting to waste you.
Hicks will go on telling you the water's worth drinking while they accumulate gargantuan tumors public healthcare will have to pay for. Special interests will keep on telling you that anyone opposed to exploitation is a communist, radical feminist, or pathological environmentalist liar. Oil is reckless. Car culture is stupid. Earth is under intensive, exploitative attack for the last hundred years in the name of a flawed standard of living that nobody in the West will give up without a fight. Everyone who isn't already suffering from pollution-induced disease has been fooled and when cancer and dementia peak we'll be out of any legacy money and forced to die in the streets like forgetful, hateful animals, drinking plastic leachate garbage water from the sixties, estrogen refuse from the sexual revolution, and antidepressant pollutants from the 80's. We will feel nothing as we decline. Nobody in the west has given up on waste. Waste is killing our chances of survivability. Our weakness is killing our remaining odds. Consumerism is a rampaging lion with no serious opponents.
We fucked ourselves and being hippies is not an answer. We are going to pay for our complacency and the nature nuts will smirk at our dependent corpses and rotting cities, no matter how righteous we feel for being consumers. Then they, too, will succumb to the poison. And life will continue without us, thinking "good riddance". So go out and protest and go home, drive to the gym, and feel like a good person. You are just another sellout caught in a bad deal, another animal caught in the natural process of population peak and decline. Your impotent fury at the truth, or lack of truth, will not outlive the diseases waiting to waste you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)