Nina-Bytes: Things Left Unsaid

 

Editor’s note: Nina-Bytes is a weekday blogging series that features short analysis and commentary on articles from around the web. Want more? Click here to subscribe to NIDC today. 

 

Well folks; with a few notable exceptions in boutique liberal, or left-wing media, I think it's safe to say that these past U.S. Midterm elections haven't produced a resplendent bounty of quality political analysis in Pig Empire media. I've tried my best to fill in the blanks by talking about what these results mean for antifascists, and trans people facing down a pogrom in progress, but in the face of precisely a billion corporate talking heads declaring this a resounding victory for "liberal democracy" it really does feel like pissing into a hurricane. Like many of you, I'm just about ready to move on from this moment because the fascists sure don't seem to have given up the ghost.

Unfortunately however, it remains impossible to say we've fully explored what the US midterm elections mean, until we talk a little bit about what they don't mean. How can we figure that out? By exploring the existential threats to our society that were not campaign issues at all. While the media warned folks that democracy, abortion, and trans rights were on the ballot with various degrees of proficiency, the same certainly can't be said for climate crisis or the still ongoing covid pandemic. In today's edition of Nina-Bytes then, we're going to look at two short articles about the surprising issues this campaign wasn't about; one for each crisis.

Let's start with climate crisis, and this pre-election November 2022 article by Ricardo Gomez over at Jacobin:

No One Is Talking About Climate in the Midterms

Well it's hardly Shakespeare, but you have to give Gomez some credit for getting right to the point; which is included in the subtitle of this article. In the lead up to the election, less than one percent of all televised campaign ads for House and Senate midterm races focused on climate crisis; with little difference between Democrat and Republican candidates. This is despite overwhelming evidence that America is already in the throes of the climate apocalypse, and numerous public polls demonstrating voters actually do care about not being boiled to death on an uninhabitable planet for corporate profits.

To put it bluntly, this is terrible politics; especially for Democrats. As our author notes however, just because politicians are choosing to ignore climate crisis, doesn't mean everyone is choosing to ignore the situation. Oil companies for example, remain quite invested in the issue:

"Although 80 percent of voters support a windfall tax on fossil fuel companies — a way of recuperating money by taxing surging profits — candidates are not running on holding fossil fuel companies accountable. Instead they are ceding the narrative on environment and climate change to oil and gas companies that have gone on the offensive — spending enormously and pouring millions into campaigns up and down the ballot to protect their profits."

Please keep in mind that none of this was a secret; when both activists and data nerds are telling Democrats to run on climate crisis mitigation policies, the decision to cede the field to oil companies is an active one. Keep a pin in that thought, we'll come back to it in the conclusion.

In the meantime, let's move on to our next article; this November 9th, 2022 piece written by Abdul El-Sayed for The New Republic:

It’s Weird that Neither Party Talked about Health Care in a Pandemic

This is another short and to the point read, albeit from a far more mainstream liberal perspective. After noting that the covid pandemic isn't over, and healthcare policy discussions dominated both the 2018, and 2020 US election seasons, El-Sayed asks how it's possible neither party wanted to talk about political solutions to America’s profound health crisis in 2022? He then breaks down a few possible answers; inflation discourse, watered-down health care reforms that Democrats can't pitch as a policy success, and general apathy from a Republican Party that would rather talk about pedophiles and white nationalist conspiracy theories.

While this is all pretty standard political class chatter, El-Sayed's article is relevant primarily because he keeps bringing it back to the larger, inexplicably unspoked issue of a raging pandemic that has killed millions already; and who benefits from that silence:

"So, two and a half years into the pandemic, that leaves us in a paradox. No single issue has so fundamentally altered American life as has the pandemic—an issue that is squarely about America’s approach to public health and health care. And despite a vigorous public debate about how to address America’s clearly failing public health and health care systems going into the pandemic, the conversation about how to fix them has all been snuffed out as we emerge from it … even though we have done next to nothing about them. The health care industry is breathing a sigh of relief after vigorously fighting any effort for reform in the last two elections."

Let's be real here for a moment, alright? You don't need me to tell you why the GOP didn't want to talk about climate crisis, or healthcare policy during the midterm elections. We're talking about a hyper-capitalist, reactionary political party wholly in the pocket of the medical insurance lobby and Big Oil. Given that the Republican response to both global warming and covid-19 pretty much consisted of pretending they aren't real and threatening anyone who disagrees, their midterm strategy wasn't much of a surprise.

Explaining the Democratic Party's failure to run on broadly popular issues of vital importance to bolster their electoral chances in an election against literal fascists however, requires more examination; especially in light of their perceived weakness on economic policy issues. Promoting policy-based solutions to problems like burgeoning medical debt, pandemic relief policies, safer energy, and green sector jobs would have been a win-win situation for Democrats; forcing the GOP to talk about something they don't want to talk about, while reeling in voters who support those policies. This isn't a question of Monday morning quarterbacking either; the Democratic Party lost control off the House this election, and even a narrow defeat will now have disastrous consequences in American life.

So what's the deal then? Well, corporate media can blow sunshine up my ass all they like, but the obvious conclusion here is that as a whole, the Democratic Party is also a hyper-capitalist, reactionary political party wholly in the pocket of the medical insurance lobby and Big Oil. If you've read any of my analysis about the Biden administration's objectively genocidal climate policies so far, you know that these folks honestly do not give a damn about anyone but rich donors, and corporate capital. Once you've decided that capitalist support outweighs the lives of billions, including millions of your own people, you've also pretty much decided that a little thing like "potentially losing power to fascists" doesn't rate either.

And in the long run, that's why you can't entrust anything as important as "stopping a fascist takeover of society" to the Democratic Party, and rich liberals in general. At the end of the day, capitalist realism demands the subordination of all other concerns to capital; including civil rights, and human lives. When push comes to shove, acolytes of the free market will always be willing to sacrifice everything, especially the poors, for a sufficiently appealing price. There is no such thing as an effective antifascism, that isn't also anticapitalist, and as such any antifascist alliance with liberal capitalists cannot help but be temporary in nature.

Let the liberal establishment bask in the warm afterglow of a less-bad-than-expected loss to clown shoes fascists, but don't join them. We've got a class war to fight; and literally everything depends on a victory for the common people, against genocidal capitalists. With any luck, they won't even see us coming.

nina illingworth

Anarcho-syndicalist writer, critic, and analyst. 

You can find my work at NIDC, Can’t You Read, Media Madness and my Patreon Blog

Updates available on Twitter, Instagram, Mastodon and Facebook. 

Podcast at “Kropotkin’s Barbershop” on Soundcloud.

Inquiries and requests to speak to the manager @ASNinaWrites

Chat with fellow readers online at Anarcho Nina Writes on Discord!

“It’s ok Willie; swing heil, swing heil…”

 

 

 

Nina Bytes: Any Fool Will Do

 

Editor's note: Nina-Bytes is a weekday blogging series that features short analysis and commentary on articles from around the web.

Understanding "longtermism": Why this suddenly influential philosophy is so toxic

In a number of recent posts, I've found myself talking about billionaires, ideology, and the mainstream rise of overt fascism in the Pig Empire. Today in Nina-Bytes then, I'd like to take a moment to look at this critically important August 2022 essay on Salon about the latest nightmare ideological fad for billionaire fascists and disillusioned neoliberals; longtermism. Just what is longtermism? Let's ask philosopher and historian Émile P. Torres, the author of this article:

"Longtermism is a quasi-religious worldview, influenced by transhumanism and utilitarian ethics, which asserts that there could be so many digital people living in vast computer simulations millions or billions of years in the future that one of our most important moral obligations today is to take actions that ensure as many of these digital people come into existence as possible. In practical terms, that means we must do whatever it takes to survive long enough to colonize space, convert planets into giant computer simulations and create unfathomable numbers of simulated beings."

 

At first glance, it may not be entirely clear to the casual observer why longtermism is in fact such a dangerous, and reactionary ideology. That is of course until you start asking who exactly these folks mean by "we" and what they're implying when they say "whatever it takes." Hint: we is more or less rich and powerful people, while whatever it takes pretty much consists of sacrificing the poor, and quite possibly the planet. After all, even billions of poor people probably aren't going to build super intelligent artificial minds that will "evolve" the human species and take "us" to Mars, or something.

In case my sarcasm doesn't make it clear, the plain truth is that I don't believe what so-called longtermists claim to believe matters at all. Rather, I think what matters is that longtermism is another ruling class word salad ideology designed to justify mass murder in order to maintain capitalism in the face of a dying planet; like neoliberalism before it, or eco-fascism today. Marketing murder for profit as an ideology takes all kinds of sales pitches, for all sorts of people, and ruling class billionaire freaks are no different.

At its root this longtermism is merely a mash up of fascism, futurism, and a little bit of neoliberalism for flavoring; and all three of those reactionary headcages have at least one key commonality - the idea that some deserve to live and rule, while some deserve to serve and die. Of course, adherents and acolytes will howl that the difference lies in how those decisions are made  and who ends up in what bucket, but I think you'll find that whether the culling is based on racial animus, economic class, or a fake meritocracy, the end result of who lives in luxury, and who dies in bondage, doesn't really change much.

In other words the rise of ruling-class interest in both longtermism, and fascism in the Pig Empire, are intertwined phenomenon. They represent some, but not all, of the capitalist class's response to the objective reality that climate catastrophe cannot be stopped without ending capitalism. The capitalists, who possess outsized power in our society, have made their choice already, and now they're casting about for justifications and mechanisms to ensure billionaire reactionaries, not liberal democracies full of people, survive the coming apocalypse.

So what is longtermism? Another excuse to genocide poor people for the benefit of the wealthy and powerful. At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter what greedbag monsters and fascist killers tell themselves to fall asleep at night. What matters is that we stop them before they kill billions.

 nina illingworth

Anarcho-syndicalist writer, critic, and analyst. 

You can find my work at NIDC, Can’t You Read, Media Madness and my Patreon Blog

Updates available on Twitter, Instagram, Mastodon and Facebook. 

Podcast at “Kropotkin’s Barbershop” on Soundcloud.

Inquiries and requests to speak to the manager @ASNinaWrites

Chat with fellow readers online at Anarcho Nina Writes on Discord!

“It’s ok Willie; swing heil, swing heil…”

 

Nina-Bytes: Genocidal Promises on a Boiling Planet

 

Editor's note: Nina-Bytes is a weekday blogging series that features short analysis and commentary on articles from around the web.

 

The Big Lie Known as 'Net Zero' Will Lead Us to Climate Disaster

Well, it's safe to say that Greta warned us it would end this way. So it comes to pass that COP26 in Glasgow, an international climate conference hailed by its participants as our "last, best hope" to prevent climate apocalypse has drawn to a close; not with the promise of a future for humanity, but with a guttural howl of thinly-concealed violence. As I mentioned this morning over on Instagram, the summit has produced a carbon reduction agreement that neither does enough to stop millions from dying on a boiling planet, nor provides financial assistance in dealing with climate crisis for those on the front lines in the Global South. This is, to put it bluntly, a plan to commit genocide on behalf of capitalist and the ruling capitalist order; not that you should expect the bootlicking media in the Pig Empire to report it as such.

For a sense of what corporate media is not telling you, let's turn to this November 11th, 2021 report by environmental journalist Tina Gerhardt, helpfully reprinted over on Common Dreams. First up, our governments have collectively promised to undertake actions designed to keep the global temperature increase to 1.8 or 1.9 degrees Celsius; which would be fine I guess, except we already know anything over 1.5 degrees Celsius will kill millions. Not that this half a degree matters much, because as our author notes, those pledges are based on faulty data and the targets will at best keep temperature increases at a whopping 2.7 degrees Celsius. Which might be enough to kill billions all by itself; without even considering knock on effects.

Wait; it gets worse because, as it turns out almost none of the richest countries in the Pig Empire actually intend to reduce their carbon emissions to anywhere near zero. Indeed, most nations in the imperial core are promising merely to employ a number of dubiously scalable methods to "offset" their carbon emissions; a bit of creative, but wholly deceptive accounting known in wonk circles as "net zero carbon emissions." Does that have a hope in hell of working? Not even remotely, as Gerhardt notes in the article:

"There simply is not enough land and trees in the world to soak up the emissions of big polluters and northern governments. For these reasons, organizations ranging from Friends of the Earth to Indigenous Environmental Network, from Power Shift Africa to the Third World Network and many others, are calling for "Real Solutions Not 'Net Zero," and satirists like Australia's The Juice are directly mocking net zero as a fantasy."

Finally of course, there's the fact that most of the wealthy, heavy polluter nations in the Pig Empire aren't promising to cut carbon emissions now, but by 2050, or even in some cases 2060. How does that jibe with prior reports that we have until about 2030 to slash carbon emissions in half before we tip over into an unavoidable climate apocalypse? Surprise, it doesn't! These mad bastards are just hoping you forgot, and thus won't realize they're approaching climate catastrophe like schoolchildren putting off their essays until the night before they're due. And really, why shouldn't they? It's not like the media is going to call them out on it; and almost everyone at COP26 will be well into retirement by the time the clock strikes doomsday. 

In other words, it is no exaggeration at all to say that the "wisest" leaders of the Pig Empire just got together to craft an international pledge, to commit genocide, rather than surrender capitalism and fossil fuel profits. Let me know the next time you hear about that on the evening news.

nina illingworth

Anarcho-syndicalist writer, critic, and analyst. 

You can find my work at NIDC, Can’t You Read, Media Madness and my Patreon Blog

Updates available on Twitter, Instagram, Mastodon and Facebook. 

Inquiries and requests to speak to the manager @ASNinaWrites

Chat with fellow readers online at Anarcho Nina Writes on Discord!

“It’s ok Willie; swing heil, swing heil…”

Nina-Bytes: Bleeding Soil and Climate Theater

 

Editor's note: Nina-Bytes is a weekday blogging series that features short analysis and commentary on articles from around the web.

 

Why We Must Defund the Global Climate Wall

I think the important thing to keep in mind when you're watching the news in the Pig Empire, is that despite corporate media's microscopic attention span and atrocious coverage, nothing truly happens in a vacuum. Indeed, this is why I can't say I have very high hopes for the COP26 climate summit in Glasgow; because I know the kind of policy these sociopathic world leaders pursue at home. Take for example this November 1st, 2021 article by Todd Miller over on Common Dreams that won't even so much as make a dent in the mainstream media news cycle.

As co-author of a new report called The Global Climate Wall, Miller crunched the numbers and discovered that the world's seven heaviest polluter nations spent literally twice as much money on border security as they did on helping vulnerable countries deal with climate crisis and transition to clean energy. Furthermore, that report goes on to pinpoint the alliance of nefarious public and private sector actors working to ensure this disparity only grows. From Kenny Stancil on October 26th, 2021, also in Common Dreams:

"This nexus of power, wealth, and collusion between fossil fuel firms and the border security industry shows how climate inaction and militarized responses to its consequences increasingly work hand in hand," the authors write. "Both industries profit as ever more resources are diverted towards dealing with the consequences of climate change rather than tackling its root causes."

"This comes at a terrible human cost," they add. "It can be seen in the rising death toll of refugees, deplorable conditions in many refugee camps and detention centers, violent pushbacks from European countries, particularly those bordering the Mediterranean, and from the U.S., in countless cases of unnecessary suffering and brutality."

Back in his article, Miller then talks about the big picture scope of border enforcement enforcement spending and offers a logical solution. Since funding a dystopian police state at the border is expensive and undesirable, why not shift that money over to climate financing instead? This is of course a logical solution that would help address two recognized humanitarian catastrophes in waiting; climate crisis itself, and mass migration. The problem in American in particular however, is twofold, and I don't think either of these barriers would particularly shock Miller; a guy who writes a blog called Border Wars.

First, as the report acknowledges and I've written about earlier this year, there's a lot of influential pigs at this particular trough. This includes obvious actors like private prison contractors, or border guard unions, and less obvious actors such as weapons contractors, or venture capital firms. Which is of course to say nothing of the absurdly powerful fossil fuel lobby that couldn't care less about climate refugees but is opposed to stopping oil consumption anywhere, including the developing world. As we've noted on this very blog, poor kids and polar bears can't afford to hire lobbyists, and clearly the rich guys are investing in some kind of extremely literal climate war. 

Further compounding the problem is the centrality of nativism and anti-migrant hysteria to fascist political actors in the Pig Empire; a topic I touched on while reviewing Greg Grandin's "The End of the Myth" this past spring. The short story here is that dehumanizing and caging non-white migrants has been both profitable, and politically useful, to the very same people pushing fascism on a boiling planet. All of which brings me to my larger point I guess. Given that this same ruling class tends to control every major political party in the entire "West," I'm not really holding my breath in anticipation of how the latest climate summit is going to shake out. 

Look, if you ask corporate media what an ecofascist is, they'll point to survivalist wingers and neonazis appropriating pagan symbols and preaching Volkish mysticism. I'd argue however that modern Pig Empire immigration and climate policy already form the core basis of an ecofascist outlook. If spending billions on cages for poor brown people, while dooming whole populations to an agonizing death from behind a battery of sophisticated weaponry isn't "ecofascist," then the word has no meaning. While we pretend that there is a materially significant climate crisis prevention "debate" going on in Pig Empire governments, the people who truly own those governments are preparing for class war and the apocalypse. 

This isn't a negotiation; they're stalling for time. Time the ruling classes are using to arm up and prepare to kill you rather than surrender their golden goose; capitalism.

- nina illingworth

 

Anarcho-syndicalist writer, critic and analyst.

You can find my work at ninaillingworth.com, Can’t You Read, Media Madness and my Patreon Blog

Updates available on Twitter, Instagram, Mastodon and Facebook.

Podcast at “No Fugazi” on Soundcloud.

Inquiries and requests to speak to the manager @ASNinaWrites

Chat with fellow readers online at Anarcho Nina Writes on Discord!

“It’s ok Willie; swing heil, swing heil…”