Where are you in your critique?

[spud_meister]

When making a critique of politics, or the country, or the world, are you including yourself within your critique, or outside of it? Are the problems you seek to remedy external to you, and you to them or are you within them and them within you?

 

[multivita-man]

When making a critique of politics, or the country, or the world, are you including yourself within your critique, or outside of it? Are the problems you seek to remedy external to you, and you to them or are you within them and them within you?

I'm part of the problem, if that's what you're asking.

 

[Along Came Jones]

We're all part of the problem, if there be a problem, in the sense we're collectively responsible for the outcome of this election.

 

[multivita-man]

We're all part of the problem, if there be a problem, in the sense we're collectively responsible for the outcome of this election.

I'm thinking beyond the election and in terms of the existence of our species and its impact on the planetary systems that sustain not only civilization but life on earth. We've either already crossed or are about to cross important thresholds, and it's because of how human civilization, of which I'm a part, has transformed the earth's crust for its own purposes to the detriment of the atmosphere and biosphere.

 

[ataraxia]

Short-sighted greed, narrow self interest, fear, hatred, revenge, and lack of prudence have won the day. The hull has been breached.

Now we are just rearranging the chairs on the deck and listening to the quartet play.

 

[Mithrae]

I'm part of the problem, if that's what you're asking.

I try to be less of the problem. I haven't done well enough that I'm confident future generations will have been better off for me having existed. Hopefully. Likely better off than had some other average Australian existed in my place, and I think those around me probably are better off, so that's something at least.

 

[Napoleon]

I'm thinking beyond the election and in terms of the existence of our species and its impact on the planetary systems that sustain not only civilization but life on earth. We've either already crossed or are about to cross important thresholds, and it's because of how human civilization, of which I'm a part, has transformed the earth's crust for its own purposes to the detriment of the atmosphere and biosphere.

Let’s start at the beginning with the following question: why do you think the bolded is a problem or otherwise a bad thing?

 

[multivita-man]

Let’s start at the beginning with the following question: why do you think the bolded is a problem or otherwise a bad thing?

"...to the detriment of the atmosphere and biosphere."

That ^

 

[Napoleon]

"...to the detriment of the atmosphere and biosphere."

That ^

Around 2.5 billion years ago, Cyanobacteria began producing oxygen as a byproduct of photosynthesis. The consequence is was called the Great Oxidation Event - which resulted in profound changes to the atmosphere and biosphere and the extinction of up to 99.5% of all life on Earth. Sucks for them.

But this paved the way for the evolution of Eukaryotes and all multicellular life on Earth to come. Why should our priorities in surviving and thriving be different than any other creature? We are part of the natural world and as such in competition with every other form of life for the total domination of this planet for our own ends. And that always involves doing so at the expense of other species and the status quo. We are not some external force responsible for maintaining some kind of status quo.

 

[Mithrae]

Around 2.5 billion years ago, Cyanobacteria began producing oxygen as a byproduct of photosynthesis. The consequence is was called the Great Oxidation Event - which resulted in profound changes to the atmosphere and biosphere and the extinction of up to 99.5% of all life on Earth. Sucks for them.

But this paved the way for the evolution of Eukaryotes and all multicellular life on Earth to come. Why should our priorities in surviving and thriving be different than any other creature? We are part of the natural world and as such in competition with every other form of life for the total domination of this planet for our own ends. And that always involves doing so at the expense of other species and the status quo. We are not some external force responsible for maintaining some kind of status quo.

I'm sure that attitude makes some people feel macho.

Back in the real world though, we physically need other species for our survival - not just one or two species, but functioning ecosystems comprising a stable biosphere - and even if we didn't we psychologically them for our wellbeing.

Imagine a society which (of the options available) chose an economic system whose features include creating winners and losers and generally concentrating wealth upwards to the richest... and a consequence of that system was the inevitable destruction of all visual and musical works of art. Fair trade off? Not ****ing half - it'd be an unconscionable further harm from an already dubious system. The natural world offers infinitely more variety and inspiration than than human art, and unlike human art is irreplaceable beyond a certain level of destruction. People routinely spend thousands of dollars to go and see wild elephants or polar bears or whales, and fantasies about discovering or resurrecting ancient megafauna now lost to us are among our most popular movies. While its utility for our own survival is also a pretty damn good reason, we should protect the natural world because it is beautiful and amazing and irreplaceable.

19th century rhetoric about 'man dominating his world' is little more than juvenile machismo at this point in history. It's ignorant and inaccurate too, because more properly it's largely a handful of oligarchs around the world and their concierge class treating our fellow sentient and insentient species about the same way they would and often do treat other humans, given half a chance. The longer we remain or become acclimatized to indifference and brutality towards weaker species, the more easily we can tolerate indifference and brutality towards weaker people. So that's yet a third reason, in that it reflects and reinforces the kind of values - whether callous or compassionate - that dominate our societies.