this post was submitted on 25 Jul 2024
143 points (93.9% liked)
Asklemmy
43781 readers
877 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy π
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That's not a coherent ideology, that's an aesthetic pulled from a ghibli-inspired milk commercial, which again reveals how an aesthetic can get taken advantage of by right-wing interests if there is no strong ideological framework.
There's no call to action, no theory to set to praxis. There is a goal, but no method to get there. Like all such movements, its doomed to fail the way the Owenites did.
I love environmentalism and solar energy, veganism and self-sustainability. However, solarpunk as an encompassing "movement" is not the path there, as it's an aesthetic.
This is written like someone that hasn't kept up with solarpunk since that commercial came out.
What theory and praxis has come out since then?
Idk why you think it has to have theory or praxis to be a movement. It does have a manifesto but I kinda doubt you care about that. There's enough people that are interested in the topics that solarpunk encompasses to give it legitimacy.
Tbh your position is kinda disenfranchising to people that got into gardening, anti consumption, diy, gurilla grafting or any other facet of solarpunk because of it being under the umbrella.
I was interested, actually. I read through it, a lot of things people say they stand for and against, and what types of art styles they like and envision, but no actual theory or praxis behind it.
I already stated why it needs a strong ideological backbone to avoid being taken advantage of by ecofascists, but I'll restate it: bad actors can and will use the aesthetic to push alternative messaging, just like what already happened to cottagecore.
Those are certainly good things, I never stated that Solarpunk is only "bad," in fact I think many good things have come from it. However, to paint it as a place of "happy communists" when there have been ecofascists using it to push their messaging, is a bit off, hence why I pointed it out and explained my issues with it overall.
I've not been aware of ecofascist cooping the movement. But I imagine the vegan mods would sus that out quickly π
I suppose my point is that a movement doesn't have to know everything about itself to be effective and while anecdotal; I've learned a lot about communism/socialism and mutual aid from solarpunk spaces.
Not saying the Solarpunk community on Lemmy definitely has it, but it is a problem with the "movement" itself overall, like all aesthetic-movements do.
That's a good thing! I would still try to learn and read Theory outside of a solarpunk context though.
I've picked up Conquest of Bread by Peter Kropotkin at the request of a comrade at our mutual aid organization. But I still don't think you understand that Solarpunk is a point of intersection to extend a post scarcity, environmental sustainability and social justice to people that are less aware of these concepts.
The Bread Book is pretty good, but Anarchism and Other Essays by Emma Goldman would probably be better when it comes to actual Praxis.
I also wouldn't discount Marxism either. Anarchism is appealing to new leftists, but there are many misconceptions about Marxism I see in Anarchist circles, like the idea of Communism not having a Government. Marx wasn't an Anarchist, he advocated for central planning and a government run by the people, but without the previous elements of Capitalist society he called the "state," ie Private Property Rights and Capitalist policing.
It's a vibe, and an aesthetic. People fans of the aesthetic can also push methods of theory and praxis, but as it stands it is generally describing an ideal, without the structures or actions necessary to get there. Marxism and Anarchism both have those answers, Solarpunk by itself does not, which is why I am saying it is vulnerable to bad actors.
If it doesn't have ideas and it isn't testing those ideas through social practice it isn't a movement?
Except movements are rarely focused like that. I doubt The Black Panthers knew school lunches and child care were going to be the traction they needed when they started theirs. Just like I doubt the kid that just heard of solarpunk and wants to learn how to grow veggies because of it, understands what their effort might do to change their community.
I'll admit solarpunk is very much in a spaghetti on the wall phase rn. But it's also barely a decade old.
Incorrect, the Black Panther Party was Marxist-Leninist and was attempting to build up a vanguard party, and a part of that theory is building up dual power and parallel structures to fold the public in and garner support.
Effective political action is focused and intentional. The BPP had a plan. There is no central solarpunk organ for democratic decision making, there is no party program. They have nothing that would make them an effective org.
It's focused after they realize what is effective. The BPP had a plan after canned food drives and fund raisers weren't. Why does there have to be a central organ for it to be a movement? I never claim for solarpunk to be an organization. But at this point I feel like you intentionally missing the point. Thanks for the talk though.
No, it wasn't. Have you read any of the first hand accounts of the BPP?
The point of movements is to accomplish things. Solarpunk isn't a movement if there is no theory of change.
you're welcome to check out solarpunk thought leaders like andrewism! though i have to admit i doubt anything anywhere will ever meet your standards
How the fuck do aesthetics have thought leaders are you serious? Should I start calling OneohtrixPointNever a thought leader in fuckin post-gothic electronic shoegaze or whatever the hell his whole aesthetic is called?
Solarpunk isn't an ideology though, it's an aesthetic that can be molded depending on the views of those using it. I never said good people can't use solarpunk to push a good message, I said there's nothing stopping people from using Solarpunk to spread a bad message.
that's the conversation we're having, isn't it? i'd say solarpunk as an ideology predates solarpunk the aesthetic. che guevara shirts are sold in stores, after all.
this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-Ng5ZvrDm4