🍂 Where do you fall politically? (And, if you're up for sharing, how do your politics inform the way you approach climate action?) 🔗Get 40% off Nebula using my link: go.nebula.tv/occ 🌲Watch the bonus video on the USSR's ecological impact on Nebula here: nebula.tv/videos/occ-how-environmentally-destructive-was-soviet-planning 📽Watch the full interview with the authors of Half-Earth Socialism on Nebula here: nebula.tv/videos/occ-an-interview-with-the-authors-of-halfearth-socialism
"The goal of oppressors is to limit your imagination about what is possible without them so you might never imagine more for yourself and the world you live in." That quote by Ashley C Ford was the highlight for me. The problem I feel and see moving forward is just the massive scale at which change needs to happen. It's hard enough to align my own lifestyle with the values I profess, let alone bring about deep structural change to worldwide systems.
That is why, my friend, devoting at least part of our time and energy to participating with others in building movements which generate substantial impact is what we need to do now. It's not possible for these challenges to be met and resolved effectively on an individual basis. And believing, whether consciously or unconsciously, that is what we have to do, that this is the only way open to us, is a direct product of the way we have been programmed by a capitalist-dominated world. No one can do this on their own. 👍
@@TheFlyingBrain. To be fair to capitalism, the reason it dominates is that not everyone feels oppressed by it. It can allow someone to trade something of no value to them (such as if have grown more than the local area actually requires), for an amount of money that can be later used to obtain something else. (likely replacement of soil nutrients used to produce what was grown and removed from the growing area) The problem arises in short-term capitalism. The dead don't make any money to spend, so long-term capitalism does try to remain sustainable. But short-term capitalism is just about making as much as possible, as fast as possible, completely selfishly. This is why capitalism has to be responsibly restricted, to keep it from greedily exploiting something for short-term gain.
@@lily9025you have stated the important facts, why does it need explaining? The explanation is simple though, what we are doing to the atmosphere is making the oceans more acidic & warmer faster than evolution can keep up so things are dying. Not to worry though, after we've killed ourselves off the world will spend the next few thousand years rebalancing itself & will survive just fine without us.
"It's hard enough to align my own lifestyle with the values I profess, let alone bring about deep structural change to worldwide systems." Yes. We got a word for that. It's hypocricy. If I'm being kind. When such a belief/ ideology is system-wide, it's called much worse names than that. Just 1+1=2.
*The choice is literally just:* 1) Smaller economies focussed on peace, stability, health, happiness and planet healing. 2) Business as usual, GDP/growth at all costs. The costs being, human wellbeing, happiness, health, and the total ruination of the planet upon which we depend. You'd think the choice is easy, but we are not governed by people willing to make the easy choices...
@@youtubesucks1499 So why don't YOU maybe think that not everyone can or should start a business (co-op or otherwise), that co-ops aren't always enough and some people, ya know, don't live in the friggin US! Assumptions much?
@@youtubesucks1499hierarchy is more efficient within capitalism. "entrepreneurs" due to their dictatorial position in the firm can more easily extract value for the investors, therefore cooperatives can't compete on dictatorial markets
The reason Cuba uses Oxen instead of tractors is because they are literally under embargo and can't get access to replacement parts or petroleum. Its also why they still have cars from the 1950s still running. They didn't do it because they thought it was better for the environment. Draught animal farming is more labor intensive and produces lower yields. They did it because it was either they used Oxen or they wouldn't have food period. This isn't a desirable outcome. The PRC has huge swaths of land occupied by peasant farmers who use animals to pull plows. The government has spent the last 30 years trying to get modern farming equipment for the countryside, literally the opposite of what Cuba had to do.
@@handsomeboi3767 Imagine if Canada or Mexico was forbidden from trading with the US. Do you think either economy would be doing well? They wouldn’t. They’d still have trade with Europe, but it’s more expensive both to sell and to buy. For a country that’s already economically underdeveloped, that is a huge deal. Florida, home to one of the largest commercial ports, is less than 200 km from Havana. Trade with the US would be faster and cheaper. But instead, they rely on Russia or Europe, who charge significantly more. The whole point of the embargo was to do this exact thing. It worked, Cuba is less developed than near peer countries.
" ... is because they are literally under embargo" complete and utter BS!! Cuba is free to trade with any country that is not taking part in the embargo, which includes other Communist countries. It's not like there is a fleet of warships surrounding Cuba and cutting off goods from reaching it. Also - Many items are excluded from the embargo. Cuba's biggest problem is, and has always been that COMMUNISM SUCKS. It doesn't work, it never has worked, it's never going to work.
@@gmodrules123456789 is like you are a highly educated cuban or a very knowledgeable person, many cubans do not know this facts let alone people outside the country
I lived in Scotland in the West Highlands for 2 years and I must say I loved it and it was definitely more egalitarian minded, but the problem was too much was still in the control of Westminister. Scotland needs its independence, but don't start me on that whole Brexit scam that swung the last independence vote the wrong way :(
I've recently been entirely disillusioned with capitalism and find it pretty much impossible to carry on participating in it, which is a bit of a problem being a self-employed contractor and finding it hard to reconcile that with still having to make a living :( I'm actually quite disgusted and repulsed by our society, and I live in South Africa so the inequality gap is even bigger here than in US or UK. And the worst of all is our alleged governing party is / was / claims to be a leftist pseudo-socialist organization, but is really just a monstrously corrupt gang that is 100% driven by an insatiable hunger for taking money
Being a self-employed contractor is probably the least bad way to participate in capitalism. You can decide what happens with the money you earn, instead of it being hoarded or spent on things that will continue to cause harm.
What's important to remember is that even though the system is awful and exploitative, the work we do often matters to others, it's rarely completely meaningless. It's also important to recognise that in the cracks of where the system fails we can grow the roots of a better one. Your advantage as self-employed is that you can decide what to do with your company's money. Maybe invest in local projects to help disadvantaged communities. Maybe fund education. Maybe fund worker's rights associations or even found or fund a political party that can be trusted to act responsibly. Nihilism will not change the world, acting for change will.
@@portvcale Do you realise how "a bot made by a corporate PR department to spam internet comment sections with tired cliches" you sound, in the world where everyone can see the fallacy of that ideology?
Imagining the level of individual participation in government necessary to make eco socialism a reality is difficult. Does anyone else feel that one of the main issues with our current system is the lack of the average person’s involvement in the political process?
I see political participation as the biggest problem of democracy at the scales of current national populations and representative democracy greatly suffers from it. Surely, modern technology can facilitate the engagement that the lack of it hinders.
@@artiaher8693 I think the problem with modern technology is that social media is most of it. and it's an echo chamber meant to divide people on trivial problems like these.
Our government is like having narcissistic parents. They make decisions that benefits them only, lies to us, emotionally and physically abuses us, poisons us, let's others hurt us for own gain, pretends to love us but uses us instead. This is why we have so many mental and physical problems, look what having narcissistic parents does to you. See similarities too? We need caring parents that also care about the future generations and the environment. I'm so done with our musty dusty government puppeteers and its puppets. What good is wealth if everything around you is suffering and dying?
who would've thought that profit over all else includes overlooking our own survival. Edit: neoliberal coping is actually hilarious, please don't give these people any attention, since that's clearly what they want. who else besides trolls would click on a video about socialism from a channel that exposes how capitalism and it's rhetoric, lies, etc. kills our planet?
@@youtubesucks1499 In order to have an income and pay off your loans. Profit is what is left over after all of your expenses are deducted, including your income and investment loan money. Most businesses are simple mom and pop stores and single famliy farms.
Huh, algorithmically aided socialist planning to fight climate change and make the world a better place you say? What a coincidence, I'm currently in a computer science and software engineering programme at uni because I want to learn what I need to try making very nearly exactly such a thing.
No, you are just hopeless and projecting onto others. Don't worry, just obey your masters and keep your head down. You'll be fine for the most part. People don't really live that long in the grand scheme of things. @@derrickcox7761
I think some good places software engineering can be used for those goals, is to turn "big data" toward better informed resource logistics as well as "telepresence"/remote work technologies. Data science is heavily used to inform about the effects of climate change, but it doesn't seem to be used as much to inform how to solve the logistics of efficient distribution of resources to fight it. Tech related to remote work reduces commuting, increases opportunities (both for workers and for employers), and allows a human brain to puppeteer machinery instead of less trustable A.I (due to "black box" nature of neural networks).
from 1975 to 1979, communist Cambodia emitted close to zero industrial carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, and like you suggested would be a good thing in the video, everyone lived on farm lands instead of feeding the city. of course, everyone was equally poor and millions had nothing to eat thanks to the centrally planned economy and redistribution of wealth. As a Cambodian i am very skeptical of any grand solution that places socialism as the main driving force. I understand capitalism as it currently is does not take care of people well, but please do not repeat the mistakes of the 20th century by going back to soviet style socialism.
Yes, the issues was that they shook hands with the transnational business interests, essentially becoming capitalist and caring about profit, not quality of life. Why communism and anarchism were usually persecuted in those countries during those regimes.
I agree with you i just want to add something to the discussion, capitalism (or the free market) is actually a net positive, both economically and morally BUT there is always corruption in the government, the larger the government the larger the corruption which means that after having a centralized economy in cambodia (large government) there were many crooked politicians who under the guise of "capitalism" sold their country and people's livelyhood for their own interest, never letting the true free market actually develop. Maybe you agree or dint i would like to hear your opinion on this.
Masaya, I agree with you. People don't anderstand how many people was killed by communists in ussr for their social experiment. No freedom, total terror
There's something ironic about putting an educational video about the environmental destruction of the Soviet Union behind a paywall when its intended purpose is to teach the masses about how we can avoid similar mistakes in the future.
@@robinbreeds9217 no, it isn't. UK hasn't had a popular revolution, so it isn't socialist. You may be talking about a social democracy and the welfare state, but that's MILES away from a socialist country like Cuba, China or Noth Korea, for example
its honestly not even that hard to perform the actions needed to achieve sustainability, whats monumentally hard is getting the people that need to agree, to agree to plans..
You are so right, it isn’t as hard to do the action, but the higher ups don’t do it. So maybe we need to move ahead without the higher ups? One Small Town Contributionism is community by community and aims for prosperity and sustainable abundance for all in that local region. It really can be done.
@@coolioso808 the issue is that to start a town you need to raise a new governing body, with a mayor and all, otherwise, the land youre settled on is under jurisdiction of the nearest major settlement. if they dislike your ways of living, they'll shut you down.
@@xirensixseo One Small Town is not at all about starting a new town on some land in the boonies, no. It is about using current town infrastructure, people and resources to co-create and share the abundance and prosperity we can create when we work together, without waiting on Mayors and Councils to agree on everything. They may be aware and somewhat involved in this community co-op network, but the OST community can democratically elect their own People's Council and come to collective decisions that way, still going through the legal process in the town to acquire land, resources, etc. Most modern places in the world have some form of worker co-ops or non-profits, so that is going to be legal. The strategic difference with OST is that it is integrated across all sectors from food to energy to clothing to housing, etc. and most labor is freely done by volunteers (i.e. contributionism). That keeps expenses very low and abundance can be easier to generate, as well as profits that go back to the community at least 60% share. If you have other questions or concerns on this issue, feel free to ask. It's important to go through these issues to find viable solutions.
Urban gardening might look nice on paper, but in reality plants grown in polluted environment such as cities, with their heavy traffic and industry, accumulate the pollutants in their own organs, either directly from the air through their leaves, or indirectly from the soil, which then accumulates in our own bodies through our food. Raised beds does not eliminate this problem. (Unfortunately we also suffer from this same pollution by the very act of breathing)
That is a natural filtration process. Sounds good to me! By the time it affects someone, will anyone really be able to prove that it was that versus usual lifestyle and old age stuff?
I'd still think it's worth it if it's coupled with greater plans. Obviously an ecological plan would include decreasing air pollution in cities through things like incentivising electric public transit, enviromentally less destructive heating systems, etc. And during the transitional process having polluted food is still better than having no food.
I personally have started putting native plant beds in spots I don’t trust the soils for human consumption! Hoping some form of bioremediation takes place, that the plants will stabilize pollutants so they don’t filter out someplace else, and if the plants are able to remain healthy enough hopefully they will provide habitat and food for my local wildlife that’s suffering from a lack of both.
Urban gardening functions as nothing but an ideological self-delusion. Photosynthesis requires vast areas of land that is not available in cities. The odd chili or lime grown on a balcony has no meaningful caloric value and does not make anyone even one bit self-sustaining. Carl Folke et. al. calculated that cities require land 500-1000 times the size of the city itself for its metabolic consumption and to be able to assimilate the waste it produces.
00:04 Capitalism is driving ecological collapse 02:55 Capitalism disrupts the natural regenerative cycle, leading to ecological imbalance 05:52 Ecosocialism advocates for an economy prioritizing well-being of all people and the planet. 08:53 We need vibrant visions and debates about the future world under socialism. 11:43 Gosplant: Algorithmic planning tool for ecological society 14:26 Eco-socialism aspires to global egalitarian redistribution and respectful management of human interaction with nature. 18:04 Ecosocialism and the example of Cuba's organic farming 20:50 Cuba's socialist agricultural revolution transformed the country. 23:40 Cuba's socialist organization represents ecosocialist degrowth in action 26:21 Advocacy for sustainable transportation and harm-reduction strategies 28:48 Support Our Changing Climate through Nebula Capitalism is driving ecological collapse - Soil degradation is a result of capitalism's pursuit of profit and capital accumulation, leading to ecological collapse. - The relentless transformation of nature into marketable goods disrupts the natural cycle of production and reproduction, resulting in the degradation of soil health and ecological imbalance. Capitalism disrupts the natural regenerative cycle, leading to ecological imbalance - Under capitalism, peasant farming is replaced by wage-labor system, disrupting the return of soil nutrients - Ecosocialism is proposed as an alternative that prioritizes humanity and nature over profits Ecosocialism advocates for an economy prioritizing well-being of all people and the planet. - It calls for a worker and peasant-led revolution to rip ownership of production away from the elite and put decision-making power into the hands of the masses. - Ecosocialism specifically emphasizes a democratically planned economy based on social and ecological constraints. We need vibrant visions and debates about the future world under socialism. - Half-Earth Socialism calls for a socialist planned economy that focuses on land preservation, minimizing emissions, and a good life for all. - Socialist planning is crucial in the context of climate change to understand what actions are necessary at all levels. Gosplant: Algorithmic planning tool for ecological society - Gosplant uses linear programming algorithms to create broad plans for cutting emissions, rewilding land, and maintaining a good life. - The plans created by Gosplant are disseminated, debated, and transformed at global, national, and local levels, being subject to constant motion, transparency, accessibility, and debate. Eco-socialism aspires to global egalitarian redistribution and respectful management of human interaction with nature. - It advocates for public ownership of the means of production and decommodification of social life globally. - It seeks to mend the metabolic rift of capitalism by embracing replenishment over extraction and heal the broken relationship with the land. Ecosocialism and the example of Cuba's organic farming - Ecosocialist manifestos emphasize communal stewardship, ecological production, and anti-imperialism as key throughlines. - Contemporary example of ecosocialism in action: Cuba's transition to organic farming during the Special Period after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Cuba's socialist agricultural revolution transformed the country. - Isolated from trading partners, Cuba adapted with initiatives like farmer to farmer knowledge sharing and urban farming. - By emphasizing sustainable and permaculture-oriented systems and prioritizing food access, Cuba successfully built an ecosocialist agriculture. Cuba's socialist organization represents ecosocialist degrowth in action - Cuba deepens connection between people and land through agroecological and urban farming cooperatives, increasing literacy, food access, and minimizing fossil fuel use - Ecosocialism requires the long collective struggle of the working class and peasants taking control of production, possibly involving revolution and starting in countries like India and the Philippines Advocacy for sustainable transportation and harm-reduction strategies - Advocacy for safe, accessible, and electrified public transit, and extensive bike infrastructure. - Examples of harm-reduction strategies such as blocking pipelines, defunding the military and police, and advocating for a four-day work week. Support Our Changing Climate through Nebula - Get early access to videos and exclusive ad-free content - Support a community of educational creators
If all we need to do is solve climate change, then why do we also have to completely change our economic system? Or if climate change is such a massive issue that we can barely solve it with capitalism then why would we also add on the extra difficulty of changing our economic system to socialism? I've noticed a lot of contrarian socialist / leftist / progressive opinions being put forward lately that claim to have answers to what ails us. But never really seem math out the reality of what they're asking of us. Personally I don't want to have 20 years of fighting to establish the new socialist revolution only to then be able to rebuild the lost technologies that will let us beat climate change...
@@FruitcakeElemental-dv1lu Basically it's because Capitalism is the root cause of the whole disaster, and it gets downplayed most of the time. Why should completely change our economic system? Because it's inner workings are harmful to all of us, overworked employees have severe health risks, underfunded education systems make students miserable and limits there education and to our concern the overgrown industries (meat, plastic, etc.) harm the enviroment and you can keep going finding awful society problems related to the capitalist model. Math out what they're asking of us: Our world needs direct action, people on the streets fighting against this system with protest, sabotage, etc. Organizing with your community for better helping itself and those around. I don't know if Socialism is the best course of action for this, but it's significantly better than capitalism. My question is; Why should we entertain a poison which harms us so much?
@@FruitcakeElemental-dv1lu Because the premise of this video is that climate change not only can't be stopped due to capitalism, but is a side effect of late stage capitalism. We are in a world where social responsibility is far outweighed by the ability to turn a profit. We are fighting an uphill battle against climate change just to be beaten back down by the thing that created it- greed. These companies stomp out legislation that would make them change their habits with lobbyists, they stop unions from growing to keep their workers doing what they want rather than what the workers want - which is historically the socially responsible thing- and most of the people killing the planet won't be alive long enough to feel the worst of it. They are just running up our total and leaving us to pay the bill with no money because they have horded it all and parked it in assets that can't be taxed. Capitalism is the problem, climate change is just the side effect. Many economists who aren't stuck in the capitalism is life bs have agreed to this and much of what scientists have recommended to push back the effects of climate change is targeted at these companies that are just trying to turn profits. If it weren't a problem with a capitalism, it would have solved it. But the profiteering keeps holding us back.
Your initial question already shows you've understood nothing. The economic system *is* at the root of climate change and our inability to stop it as well as a plethora of other societal issues. "Personally I don't want to have 20 years of fighting" says it all, I'm happy for you that you don't have it bad enough and sorry you're so selfish that you have no interest in making the world better for everyone and future children.@@FruitcakeElemental-dv1lu
Cuban agricultural socialism has led to famine in the 1990s, after the USSR collapsed. The result? Two million people took to improvised boats and floated to the USA. Visitors to Cuba report that food insecurity and malnutrition continues.
Economics is another word for Exchange and how we go about exchanging is really really basic and important to understand. What gets measured gets managed and what gets managed gets done. Using numbers to give us feedback about what we put into and take out of the economy is a very powerful feedback process,
previous communist experiments have also promised that more planning and control will get better economic results but they've delivered only more government oppression through every tool given to them
Otherwise known as supply and demand. And the capitalist system allows lobbyists to decide what we should be demanding which tends to be anything other than the necessities of nature. Economics is not another word for exchange. They are two completely different words. Exchange is involved in the process of economics but when money can acquire worth just by sitting in a large pool then where is the exchange taking place? It's basically being stolen from the ground worker. There are a lot of creases and pitfalls in capitalist economics. Not least the problem with the idea that the wealthiest can get wealthier just by being wealthy whilst the poor get poorer just by being poor. Capitalism isn't economics. It's a smash-and-grab by money-driven ignoramuses completely ambiguous to societal and environmental equilibrium.
@@Ominousheat if you ever had capital, you'd know that you'll be losing capital if it just "sits in a bank". To grow capital you must spend to safeguard it from theft, invest it in assets whose value risks instead of falls etc. Regarding market deformation, socialist governments (which are just as or more corrupt) decide on what we should be demanding and supplying, so that is much more market distortion obviously.
@@chris-2496 I asked where was the exchange made concluding it was taken from the ground worker. Yes, it can sit in a bank for a long time before any management may be needed. And back to my first point free markets are not in line with what should be demanded. They just want to make money through sales. The shop, warehouse, labourer and service workforce is doing the grunt work for the investor who, with a plethora of choices, merely has to say where they want their money put. That in itself decides the fate of many of those grunt workers. And competition in the markets will always negatively affect the pay of the middle and lower classes. Acquiring cash in such a fascist manner is hardly an honest day's work let alone reasonable compensation for their lack of effort. Do you even know how big the disparity is between CEOs and the average worker, let alone the poorest. An average CEO's pay is 278X larger than the "average" worker. You don't have to call it corruption when it's legally allowed to be done, do you? FFS! Wake Up!
@@OminousheatIn my comment above I'm not implying the existing dominant economic system is perfectly designed or anything of the sort. I'm making a comment about the power of feedback and how money (or numbers) provide us with a basic and powerful feedback process that organizes society. Dismissing the monetary feedback function as irrelevant is not wise. Can the monetary process be modified to create better outcomes? Yes it can. Monetary reinvention is essential to creating a healthier society.
Please share citations or sources more clearly, maybe with timestamps etc on your notion site. This would allow for better and more clear communication based on your videos. Thanks for your awesome work.
@@abody499 i know and im very happy it is there, but it would be way better if the sources would kinda linked to timestamps etc. I love TH-camrs sharing their sources for academic/trust reasons, but having more precise Quotes/sources would be awesome. Or maybe im just used to reading papers and this whole academic knowledge path.
@@abody499 it is not and neither am i enroled in that field, but having that network of trusted souces and quotations would be quite an upgrade, for diving deeper in some references. I study pedagogy and social science and there are quite a bunch of creators in that field who work on their video essays more or less the same as on there scientific papers.
@@abody499 it sure is not, but whats the downside of applying the network of trust that a reasonable citation adds to every comunication of public replicators? Especialy in post-fact societies this would severly increase the quality of any outlet. anyway have fun
I really appreciate that you are speaking about these issues- socialism, post-capitalist ideas, and how they relate to the biosphere and our personal lives. Thank you.
@@derrickcox7761 In the realm of intellectual pursuits, wherein I admittedly occupy a relatively nascent and incipient stage of proficiency and comprehension, I find myself ardently solicitous of guidance or recommendations vis-à-vis academic or scholarly endeavors that I might engage in. My enthusiasm for augmenting my knowledge base is not to be understated, albeit I must concede that the celerity with which I assimilate new information may not align with traditionally expedited parameters, contingent upon the subjective interpretation of your desire for an expeditious acquisition of knowledge. Concurrently, I discern a presupposition implicit in your response to my prior commentary, suggesting an assumption of my lack of formal education. This inference, I must respectfully refute, as I have indeed partaken in a traditional higher education. It may be that the breadth or depth of my educational journey does not encompass areas you might consider of paramount significance or utility. In light of this, I entreat you not to eschew any opportunity to illuminate your perspectives, particularly as they pertain to domains of knowledge or disciplines you perceive as quintessential or invaluable. I look forward to your recommendations and guidance.
Have you said that Marx said the workers are slaves? We need to tell the world that the wage system is also slavery, because capitalists say that if we get paid we’re not slaves, but that means if we get paid one CENT in our lifetime “we’re not slaves” which is insane. They also think it’s right to give all the money to a few people, which is insane. Great video! Thanks.
First time I've seen the social metabolism explicitly brought into the discussion. It's the concept that needs to be at the centre of how we plan the future. Not that I'm holding my breath...
@zuz-ve4ro I'd say the incentive is to provide a need for society, but yeah, obviously he was loading a question in bad faith. See the way he frames it using "ideology" as an implied pejorative. What such people fail to understand is that everything society does is ideological.
@@abody499 Nope. Most entrepreneurs will not put their life savings up and risk everything for the "greater good". You think Amazon, Ring and Scrub Daddy were invented and brought to market for the greater good or to make money for the risk taker who put everything on the line?
@@youtubesucks1499 "Well, what's the INCENTIVE to open a business under your economic ideology?" Uhhh, the person who starts and owns the business makes more money than do the people who work for them--same as now. You would still occupy the same relative position as you do now in terms of your ranking in terms of the percentile of wealth compared to others, but the absolute differences between the rich and poor must shrink. The research is VERY clear that vast economic inequality is a social toxin that ramps up pretty much every social dysfunction under the sun while increasing political dysfunction and corruption. The only way to save the planet and human civilization while not letting billions of people starve is to shrink the global economy by about 50% while making income and wealth distributions far more equitable. You may hate that if you wish, but it's the only way to avoid going over the edge of the cliff.
I think the organopónicos are a great example to highlight but it's important to point out that Cuba is currently going through a food crisis that is arguably as bad as the special period. So, food very much still has to be imported left and right to feed the people and yet the Party has used over half of the state budget to build luxury hotels... It's a complex affair, but the organopónicos are a step in the right direction, just not supported enough by the state
For those who need to the definitions: Socialism is the ownership of labor, utilities and other resources, and housing by the individuals who are working, consuming and living. Capitalism is the ownership of someone else's labor, utilities and resources, and housing. Authoritarianism is when this ownership is held by the state. Anarchism/Libertarianism is when this ownership is direct. Mutualism is an Anarchist/Libertarian Socialist system where Worker, Consumer, and Housing cooperatives exist in a free market, but prevent exploitation by shareholders and owners, utilities and middlemen, and rent-seeking landlords as the workers, consumers, and tenants are the stakeholders.
Socialism is the common ownership of the means of production and distribution and democratic control by and in the interests of all regardless of gender, age ability or skin pigmentation. There is no money, wages, buying or selling or government/state.
Like you say. Abrupt Climate Change can doom all of our counter actions. Let’s not lose the icecaps. SRM in its many forms is immediate temporary medication until we get back into balance. As example. A gram of sulphur in the upper atmosphere has the enough shading effect to counter (by shading) a ton of CO2. That a million to one leverage.
Watch: Dominion (2018) - full documentary We can't fix the past, but If the average human learns to love and reduce harm caused to others, then we could unite against the nebulous forces that ruin this earth.
Absolutely agree. Politically I'm disgusted with government. My hope and faith with the common man who can certainly govern a lot better than the egocentric narcissitic bullies that are attracted to government.
@danielcreatd872 I'm completely fine with that, but the problem is you're just plain wrong. With rotational grazing, mob grazing and other sustainable grasslands management practices, you can have almost twice as many animals per acre than continuous grazing and have healthier animals with a better nutrient profile than animals who've only eaten one feed. Plus, you can use the natural behaviors of the animals to seed and plant the area to transition into a healthier and more dense ecosystem that captures tons of carbon on its own.
@@PaleGhost69if everyone were allowed to move to this model there wouldn't need to be any revolution to any end. It would just be a natural transition out of an unnatural way of living.
🎯 “The object of the vegan society is to oppose the exploitation of sentient life, whether it’s profitable to do so or not” Donald Watson- August, 1945 “Veganism is…a way of living which avoids exploitation, whether it be of our fellow men, the animal population, or the soil upon which we rely for our very existence.” Eva Batt- 1964 💚🐾✊🏼💚🌏✌️💚
I think we should take a moment to acknowledge the very hard things that will have to be unlearned by the masses before other systems can be effectively implemented. People are tired and overworked and no matter how perfect a system sounds, people are rightfully fearful of the protection of themselves and their loved ones. We need to always practice compassion for the extreme shift that people will have to undergo to understand these beneficial policies. Change is *hard*
You're right but there's a good chunk of people who just because they had a relative success with capitalism now live by it (even though socialism would help them more). At that point it's just like talking to a doll that only says "socialism bad cuz everyone starves" which is such a dumb argument
This short clip at 17:23 is from Töölahti park, Helsinki, Finland. Helsinki main station is just outside of view. Just wanted to point out that none of the buildings seen in the clip are housing units. They're all office buildings. Would be better if more effort was put into visual presentation.
Anarchy was misused in this video. Anarchy is when no single entity rules. It’s a collective responsibility of horizontal power and organizing of society. If anything ecology and anarchy are complimentary. Ask @Andrewism or @Anark to discuss both anarchy and ecology. 💜
This is a beautiful vision/outcome. To my thinking, the critical omission is what is to be done with the immovable selfish and narcissistic who refuse to be won over by such a vision. What do we do with those who have not been moved by compassion or existential threats to seek shared wealth and well-being, those who are perfectly satisfied with accumulating wealth and consolidating power?
@@fuxan Nihil novi sub sole, I recall labor camps scattered over Soviet Union providing slaves for the state and Killing Fields of Cambodia. Was it a lesson for you? I think not, otherwise you wouldn't sing such an old song.
fuxan Lol good luck. Those of us with something to lose know what you are up to and are prepared. When it comes to finally dealing with the slow burn of urban self destruction and it's spillover, the core of left "leadership" will be persuaded to go away quietly and they will even keep their wealth, just won't be allowed near power ever again.
This is the golden question that always shows the true intentions of communists - getting power and resources even if that means killing and oppressing people who disagree. Cruel ideology hiding under the cloak of compassion.
How is this not bleak, this paints an extremely dystopian future under false pretenses. We don’t have to worry too much about climate change but climate degradation which can be solved much easier than we are led to believe and has been done before. I’m not down with obvious neoliberal Malthusianism masquerading as socialism, especially when it calls for revolution in other countries because this makes any kind of diplomacy impossible. This is why Stalin kicked out the Trotskyist’s who similarly wanted a group of global intelligentsia to run the world
It's a necessity. As the last 30 years carry a lesson for those with eyes open: Human beings ultimately are not constructively motivated by warnings of doom. People need a vision they can believe in to work for, as much or more than they need to hear alarm bells ringing.
Planning is good. Kudos to the video for including linear programming. Actually kudos to this video for a lot of things. I don't know if it's just a coincidence of videos I've watched in the last couple days but it feels like "metabolic rift" is trending on lefty channels.
The incredible part about this type of agriculture is.... it is still clearly possible for one farmer to grow much more food than what they personally need. After all, this is the basis of how we achieved population growth and various agricultural systems in the first place. The hard part is... this form of agricultural will always keep at least 25% of the population involved in agriculture, simply due to it's labor intensive type of farming. That's a tremendous amount of people involved in agriculture, which isn't bad, but it's a lot of people not doing other things. Furthermore, this agricultural class has a hard time getting out of poverty, to become what most of us would deem middle class of some kind and that would hold in a capitalist or socialist society. A person is only producing X, and if that's not $100k worth of food/year... it's simply hard to form an economic middle class so to speak. This form of agriculture is great, but needs technologies help. The great part is, we live in an era where there is rapid development of machines to assist. I have a vineyard, so I'm a farmer. 10 years ago, they were coming up with the first robots to prune grape vines. Soon, this will be on the market. 20 years from now, those will be much more common place, and this is technical enough skill that many people have thought that it's near impossible to train a machine to do such a task.
Yeah it’s quite possible that socialism has struggled so much partly because we weren’t quite at a technological level where a nation could really reap the rewards of that system. Bits and pieces have shown up here and there though; for example, Project Cybersyn in Chile, which enabled the workers to communicate with other factories and also request resources that they needed for their work, without needing to go through a manager or some other bloated corporate structure. They were able to keep their factories running in spite of the factory owners shutting the buildings down- they managed the logistics themselves and Chile saw a net increase in output during that brief time period. So what I tend to ask now is: what if, instead of always fixating on each individual system supposedly failing on its own, we took what worked from each one and combined it with our improved automation and science of today?
@@TheCrazyCapMaster that's what we call "agriculture." The study of how these plants all grow. Over the last 20,000 years... we've figured that out fairly well. We know how plants grow well. Most of the time, it just doesn't really matter that much. Agricultural practices are dictated by economic practices. Same as everything else in society...
I mean, idk where you live, but plenty of people are already established in agriculture and farming, and capitalism takes away their work in many countries by destabilizing the use of local resources over import, which causes the agriculture that was otherwise able to provide a steady supply for it's country to lose their job and waste tons of food that doesn't get accepted into the market because international powers control the market.
@@artorhen totally true. If the production cost for raising a pepper this way is $1.00, and the production cost for someone doing it "the american way" is $.25... it disincentivizes anyone from farming this way. The only reason this is going on in Cuba is largely down to the fact that Cuba is short on food, is sanctioned to the Nth degree, has an excess of labor, and little mechanization or technology applied to the production of their food. Most industrialized nations won't adopt this model, not that it's bad or anything, but simply because.... money. You can make more money the other way... Nations that are comparatively poorer, are going to lose out to American farmers simply because they're not teched up. The teched up mega farmer in America is largely determining the price of corn for instance, and any country competing in the global market for corn has to be able to not only produce corn at a similar price point, but if they don't, they're often either relegated to giving up farming as a profession or poverty. This same phenomena doesn't apply only to agriculture either... it's most global industries producing a physical product of some kind.
@@jonathanmillnerexcept socialism removes the need ‘to make money’, because resources are shared. I know it’s hard for many to wrap their heads around, since we’ve been participating in this pursuit for decades, but would t you be relieved if you didn’t grow grapes to ensure your survival, but instead to be shared with your local community?
Good look into these ideas would be 1970s Chile before Pinochet. The Soviet Union wasn't the most environmentally healthiest place due to the focus on their mass industrialisation campaigns, especially to match and combat the looming threat of Germany at the time. China is an example of that without the immediate threat of another country going to invade. It has demonstrated very bad results environmentally through their policies of large scale industrialisation and modernisation, both a good thing for the development of a modern society, but the next step would be to figure out more effective and less environmentally destructive means of production. China though has demonstrated that it is possible, though their results haven't dropped too largely, the plans to implement more clean energy has lead to results within China. Ever since China started their "War of Pollution" since 2014, they have seen significant drops of air contamination by 40% [According to NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH in the US] and most likely will continue this trend. They aren't perfect nor their Air is the healthiest, they still have a pretty polluted atmosphere, but the smog known to be seen in China has significantly dropped. But to get back to my point about Chile and why I brought up the Soviet Union. Chile was building a Cybernetic System that would allow people to communicate with the state, for the state to communicate to other industrial sectors to allow for efficient distribution of labour and resources. During Salvador Allende's run as Chile's President, Chile saw great improvement with their quality of life during these policies, to ensure that the country can be ran not by the Bureaucratic decisions of the state, but by the decisions of the working class people, bringing up their concerns to the state for the state to act on behalf of the people for a far more functional and stable society. Chile's Cyber Socialism would have definitely been a solution to the Soviet Union's Bureaucratic nature. At this point I am going to speculate, but if the Soviet Union would have still been a country today, if their brand of Soviet Socialism still persisted through the hardest points of their nation, there would have been no doubt that they would have tackled the Climate Question and implemented policies to improve the quality of the environment. Def look into Stalin's Environmentalism and his plans to transform the damage heavy industrialisation has done to lead down a path of Soviet Socialist Sustainability.
I would just add to this that it is worth noting that despite of the horrific pollution in China 20 years ago there are no Chinese cities on any of the lists of the world's top 10 polluted cities. As hopeless as it can seem these things can be improved when governments are actually committed to doing so. Socialist countries are capable of polluting with the rest of them but the difference is that within that system there at least exist the tools to intervene and repair the damage.
@@DinoCism The reason for this isn't because they shouldn't be at the top of that list, it's that they pay off the (I think was named Qair?) organization that posts the air quality numbers. Going by those actually familiar with China and have contacts there, like 90% of the ground water is unfit for ANY purpose and their air is so polluted that the smog affects out to Japan. In their propaganda images they've resorted to using generative A.I, and before that would ramp up the color correction so high that it would leave a blue tint over the image. Unfiltered, daytime views of China often show vast landscapes of bleak greys and browns of a collapsed local environment.
@@_Bees Hate to break it to ya, but you might want to take a look at the more recent analysis of China's economy. It's all been so state-controlled and faked, that they've even stopped releasing certain stats altogether. It's in a state of complete implosion with banks failing and both businesses and people fleeing.
The survivors will be those who came up with "ecosocialism" and every other leftist NGO invented buzzword. They have their islands and bunkers and servants.
The issue of selling Cuba's model is it is basically the same one we had before the industrial revolution where the vast majority of everyone were farmers who had to grow their own food to survive. It's massively more beneficial for everyone that agriculture be industrialized because it is magnitudes more efficient than individual gardening and has freed almost everyone in industrialized countries from what would otherwise be the compulsory career of subsistence agriculture and nothing else. Plus, Cuba is tropical, so it's able to grow food all year round, whereas the growing period for most places further from the equator is limited, sometimes severely, by their colder climates. Even if your growing season was 9 months long, that 80% of food needs met by urban gardens drops to 40%, because you are both not growing food and continuing to consume food during non-growing periods. Temperate growing seasons are more like 7-8 months, and anywhere further than that can be 5-6 months or even shorter. It's simply not feasible anywhere else. The lesson that economies should be as self-sufficient as possible to maintain individual liberty and prosperity despite shifting geopolitical dynamics is good, but Cuba's success is much more thanks to its climate than its economic system.
The first solar panel was made in 1883, the first commercial solar panel in the 1950s and the first affordable ones were available in the 70s. We coulda had solar panels on every roof in America by the 90s if oil lobbyists didn't work so hard
@@longforgotten4823 Agreed. I do wonder how many MPG equivalent those old electric cars got though. I don't know if they could do intercity travel. My issue with electric cars is the placement of the battery. They should have just kept it under the hood and lengthened the hood area to make a wider battery that could be easily removed and exchanged at gas stations (battery exchange stations) under 2 minutes. No charging required by consumer. The attendant charges the batteries and the customers pay a fee to exchange their drained battery for a charged battery.
If solar was so good it would have had its own powerful lobbyists. Things people actually want to buy make money without lobbyists and government force.
@@MilwaukeeF40C which is why we subsidized $20 billion for the fossil fuel industry in the United States alone. No, the free market monopoly crushes all opposition, competition, and innovation, so it can maximize its profit margins for shareholders.
With the emergence of Cybersocialism, through the algorithm of that genius that was Alan Turing, we can truly make the social economy planned, more equal, and accessible. Capitalism has run its course. It's time to change.
I'm happy to discuss and implement radical changes in our political and economic systems. And this seems an interesting idea. But you portrait it as if this is the solution. And it being such a complex problem, a bit more nuance and unceretenty would be good.
I think your best example of a path forward was the one you outlined for Cuba. I believe your call for an uprising to create an ecosocialist future is counter productive because the media often villainizes socialism and living in harmony with our ecosystem. For this reason we need to speak about strategies to free ourselves from the being wage slaves and cultivate the advancement of cooperatives that are democratic in nature with a specific emphasis on our basic needs such as food production and housing. Through empowering communities to wrestle back our basic needs from the current capitalistic model which values profits over all else, we need to recognize that we the people are the ones who create the wealth through our labor. So why not work for ourselves through a cooperative efforts to meet our communities needs. Thank you and be well.
It also feels like capitalism is also hacking the entire human society as well. Our entire worth has been determined by basically chance on what job can you get or how long are you willing to sell your own time. And all didn't make some CEO 0.000 1% richer
Algorithmic planning sounds VERY dystopian lol, regenerative farming is also growing under capitalism, intensive agriculture just does not make sense long-term, it only benefits banks and big ag. Farmer co-ops are the future, it does not matter if you live under capitalism or not. "Only when capitalism is destroyed can we build a better future" is coping and seething. That's why co-ops is a better option as it can work already and show it is a better system and replace it.
As a Vietnamese, I find this hilarious. I still don’t understand why the world protest against China and Russia for communism, and now they’re trying to adopt socialism =))
EXACTLY. This video shows no knowledge of actual capital. “A Farewell to Alms: A Brief Economic History of the World” by Gregory Clark, which is actually brief and accurate.
@@freyathewanderer6359 Soviet states weren’t communist. They were socialist, building communism. The party was ideologically communist, but the structure wasn’t. Communism was never achieved due to multiple reasons, WW2 being the most influential one.
Because the west is full of rich people and petty bourgeois who had been way too comfortable with the exploitation of working classes and the 3rd world. Now that the poverty is growing in the West and Europe is facing floods en masse, a lot of them are suddenly becoming socialist.
Make those other videos available to us on TH-cam!! We shouldn’t have to support Nebula to learn more about something so important! Stop gatekeeping!!!
I believe in organic urban farming initiatives. Monocropping and deforestation are huge issues with extremely simple solutions. More environmental regeneration efforts and offloading the production of food and consumable goods to organized communities.
Monocropping and deforestation are what makes food cheap though. During all of history up to maybe around the last 50 years a substantial amount of people couldn't afford food, while nowadays starvation-related deaths are extremely low even in the poorest parts of the world. What you propose would be an awesome idea in a place like Europe or US if only about 70% of the population somehow vanished and we still had access to modern technology and engineering.
Your videos are so refreshing. I forget that we can actually make life beautiful in the future. You remind me that imagination is the most important tool to fight these crises.
I liked watching your denouncement of certain aspects of capitalism by using real world solutions that have already been applied and also enjoyed watching the ad for Nebula at the end. Give Thanks for the video 🧐
Basically you have capitalism and everything that's not capitalism. Non capitalist systems require a lot of governance with all its attendant problems. Some philosophers think that the replacement for capitalism is neo- feudalism. Be careful what you wish for !!!
>Non capitalist systems require a lot of governance Yep, and the socialists view themselves as the enlightened liberators of the working class, then they sieze power, then the power corrupts them. Every time.
Your reply is beyond ignorant. It entirely ignores the history of humans that spans for hundreds of thousands of years. Just start reading. Anarchist library is a good place to start.
Planning is best done on a local level, the problem is a concentration of power, corruption, and planning at macro levels which get in the way of local plans (such as worker-owned enterprizes, focus groups of local issues, local self-reliance, local sharing, etc). I agree that having a utopian vision is important to bind us together.
I agree people should have control over the things that effect them directly, and resources should be shared and managed locally where possible. However large scale planning is also necessary. It doesn't make sense for every small town to have their own steel mill, sunscreen factory, data centre or aerospace research facility (just some random examples). The more complex the enterprise, the more far reaching coordination is useful.
How does a worker-owned enterprise even work? Not an attempt to make an internet argument, I sincerely do not understand the concept of a worker-owned production/service based org in an investment based society.
We have limited resources, I guess you know it. It's difficult to me to understand how to efficiently use resources with a central plan. You might argue that capitalism isn't using it efficiently either, but history has shown that it is still more efficient than other types of economic systems
I'm glad you're not in charge. This is such a dramatic production. Socialized farming killed 100 million people with starvation in the 20th century when they tried to socialize it in Russia and China.
Most government involvement in the economy is a terrible idea. In the farming industry there are so many regulations that it’s nearly impossible for new farms to open up due to the insane costs.(bigger farms actually lobbied for most of those regulations to choke small farms) Not only that, but the government has laws on how much food you can produce. Not to mention all of the subsidies that shouldn’t exist if we just let the free market competition which would lead to lower prices. I would actually argue that we already have Socialist farming in the US.
I wish living decently (like a decent apartment, access to clean water and fresh food, sufficient education, good quality clothing) shouldnt be a luxury but with the price of everything shooting up to the sky (and beyond) every day, living decently seems like a luxury
I can't agree with Victor Wallis. Not on the base of he being wrong, but on the basis of how history showed that all socialist expiriences had been against ecological planning. China has become the least evironmental expirience in sociliast history followed by Soviet Union which had two of the 5 biggest environmental disaster on history. On the other hand Cuba is the closest country to ecosocialism we have today.
Recently I started taking notice whenever I go to the store to buy food and non-food items how I always buy the same things and ignore like 99% of the other products, and that's just the handful of stores I go to. It made me ask myself: Who buys all the other stuff? Does all the other stuff eventually get sold? Are stores simply overstocked with stuff or have too much variety? Who's buying curry flavored camembert cheese and beef flavored potato chips? Where does capitalism draw the line?
It draws the line with what people buy. If people don't want shrimp flavored chips but they want salt and vinegar, then salt and vinegar chips continue to be made and the shrimp ones don't. It's as simple as that. Just because you don't want something doesn't mean others won't. That doesn't change the fact we need to make people pay for environmental destruction. Society shouldn't be able to just destroy stuff, destruction needs to be reflected in the price.
"Add social services" which include electrified mass transit system. That's purely insane. What about heating? How does it count in there? And cooking?
@@guy_autordie These ideas are not meant to be put in practice. If you did, the whole illusion would fall apart. Ecosocialism is a distraction to keep people from inacting realistic societal changes.
This is not gonna work. such changes don't happen overtime, the ordinary people have power to decide even now. Every buyer is voting with their money. No CEO will make a product that nobody would buy. So the problem still falls onto everyone. I think a better and faster solution is to introduce a vision, together with a plan and taxes, that would actually balance the main problem of cheap oil, which isn't actually that cheap as it causes climate change, those cause extreme weathers and extreme weather damages stuff, kills or makes people miss work at best. If all these impacts and costs would be actually calculated into everything, we would get rid of oil long time ago. But not even that happens, because these drastic solutions are very unpopular with the ordinary people and this they would vote for those, that will promise prosperity and reverting such changes. Which again speaks about the democracy. Yes we have it, however most people deciding who to vote for are deciding based on lack of knowledge and any random negative information and emotions of course. I came the whole circle and ended up, that the current voting preferences show such revolution into eco-socialism is not possible, as we can barely make small insignificant steps.
Probably if the external cost of the property rights could be internalized, that could be a great help. This would probably include the cost of pollution in accounting and some sort of carbon tax.
We do not even know what is happening tomorrow. How can we plan an entire economy. While in a capitalist economy you have different actors in which if one fails to predict the future (or is just more efficient) there are still others which can provide a good. While when the central plan fails, all the rest of the plan necessarily also crumbles while generating catastrophic consequences
The more we opt out, the weaker capitalism becomes. We can learn the practical skills our ancestors had, like making and sewing our own clothes, growing our own food, etc... we can make choices about our diets, our transportation, etc... We can protest, advocate, and support candidates for political power who support our values. It isn't enough to save our world, but it is a necessary component. Let's live our values and prepare ourselves for a greener future
Your work is always good. This video presents a host of important and, dare I say, revolutionary concepts. These are deep ideas that need to be heard. The content is so rich that I can imagine this video being broken up into at least three videos. On Nebula I hope that you can offer ad-free videos with even higher production values. To present this excellent content in a more professional way I hope that you would consider abandoning the "TH-cam" style of motormouth editing which crams your content together in a "capitalist" style of condensed information that treats the viewers as merely consumers. By giving the narrator a "breathing pause" between the ideas in your narration you can allow the ideas to "land" in a comfortable way where they can be more easily absorbed by the audience. And these are important ideas that need to be able to "land." This is how the great producers and editors give strength to their content. Watch excellent movies and watch how the actors present ideas with emotional content. Note that the camera is, more often, showing the face of an actor listening, rather than talking. This is how the emotional content and the importance of the ideas is conveyed in fine films. The listener needs a pause to consider a new idea and to absorb the novelty of it. Great narrators will never allow their words to be crammed together without breathing space. Just a thought.
Interesting thought but sadly I don't think it's possible as it could limit the reach of the videos, as many click off if they are not constantly fed with new information.
What I would like to see, rather than various optional future ways to govern, is like to see videos in this much depth, about how to realistically actually make those changes happen.
Rather than coming up with optional future ways to tell everyone what to do, I pray for everyone to get a life. If you expect government to do things you will always be disappointed.
I think the easiest path to imagine a solution to capitalism is to just imagine vastly higher democratic standards. Capitalism in its core is not democratic. It wants a small number oligarchs to control the rules in society. Which is progress coming from nobility ruling the country, but it should be obvious how that can't be the end goal. Even though countries like Iceland or Sweden obviously have way higher democratic standards than for example the US, the majority of society, even there, is still ruled by oligarchs. And its no wonder why. Even there, democratization just doesn't exist in the labour market, where most people ultimately spend most of their life.
We should make a video game..Idk where else to put this thought but a video game would lead to so many imaginings of an ecosocialist or even just general solar punk future. Like what if you had minecraft but the reward system was based upon ecological principles instead extraction and wealth accumulation?
All successful video games are communist. Nobody would play games that allow a small handful to take all the resources of the game, and be subjugated to laboring for their oppressors. People can simply play something else. And so they do. Video games offer a unique test bed for what humans actually want from society. That which they would choose if choices were provided. The populous chooses more equitable balance, because that balance offers replay-ability. A balance in the distribution of resources, so that competitive pursuits can be repeated, and groups in competition maintained. The ideology of "competition" capitalists blatantly misunderstand and poison, is actually one in which your competitors must be given consideration, and assisted when needed. That the competition can be nothing more than friendly, and mutuallism the backbone behind the friendly competition. That victory is fleeting, but the comradery is forever. Capitalism see's competition to remove the other competitor, and take their market share. (In the game of Monopoly, the game resets, and everyone starts from the beginning, because the game of Monopoly can't be played without an element of communism to create the replay-ability) *If you were to never reset the game of Monopoly, it would only ever be playable once.
Don't be fooled by the cherry picking of 'data' seen elsewhere that show positive measures vs the West. Ultimately, many Cubans would love the wealth and freedom the West has. This video looks at the low productive use of farm land and the lack of machines as a positive. I don't think a world where we take time away from research, the arts, or even consumerism and instead return to ploughing the soil as progressive.
@@shaynealbert Yes, the wealth the west (and only the rich parts) has which comes from colonialism and unequal exchange from poorer countries selling their stuff cheap because otherwise they would be in a worse state, and the freedom that only the rich have, yes many cubans probably would love that, just as much as most poor people on the west (so most people on the west period) would like it too
What an ignorant sentence. This is the government who acts alone. The young Cubans are leaving and they even embrace capitalism from the USA. Right now they are in a massive crisis. Nobody wants to stay and all you hear from the socialist fans is: "Go on but we will not move to your country anyways."
Yang kita butuhkan adalah sebuah sistem yang mengayomi seluruh masyarakat di bumi ini dan yang mengembalikan kita pada hakekat kehidupan yang paling murni atau sejati. Sudah saatnya kita memikirkan ulang apa yang sudah terjadi di dunia kita, minimal selama 500 tahun terakhir ini. Lalu dengan kebesaran hati mengevaluasi perjalanan menuju hari ini yang berakhir dengan kesenjangan sosial luar biasa serta rusaknya alam juga tata kelola bumi. Kapitalisme ataupun sosialisme telah menorehkan sejarah panjang dengan luka teramat dalam. Gagasan dan wacana alternatif yang bertumpu pada asas kolektivitas, konektivitas, kebersamaan, kepedulian, keterhormatan, dan kemandirian. Kesadaran untuk saling topang agar tidak timpang dan tumpang tindih menjadi bagian krusial untuk membentuk masyarakat dunia yang penuh kesyukuran, keberkahan dan kebahagiaan. Bahagia adalah hak dasar setiap manusia yang terlahir atas restu Sang Adi Hayati. 😊😊
The community would democratically decide how they live and what needs to go and what needs to be prioritised. Whereas currently we overproduce, over consume and waste. Why not let the community decide how we live instead of a small number of capitalists?
Some excellent critiques of capitalism in this video, but I sense a significant blind spot regarding socialism's tendency to devolve into authoritarianism, and a complete disregard for collapse dynamics quickly leading to authoritian outcomes. We've seen what happens when bureaucrats and the state are given too much power. Read Jem Bendell's Breaking Together, he presents a compelling case for ecolibertarianism being the way forward with ongoing collapse dynamics in mind.
All socialists states had democracy. Just not parliamentary democracy or republican democracy. Once you delve into how those democratic systems work you can see how they are democratic and no less authoritarian than any other democracy. UK is a "democracy" yet they had what 4-5 Prime Ministers and only 1 of them was elected by the people. In one election cycle! USA don't get me started about how gerrymandering and electoral college is far less democratic than any socialist state, if they are democracies with their flaws then socialist countries were/are all democratic.
A historian would argue that the 'capitalist mode of farming' is what enabled humanity to overcome the hunter-gatherer lifestyle that we had for most of humankind existence. It is exactly this urbanization with dedicated farming that gave us everything we have, all technology, from wheels to writing to math is due to this change in lifestyle. We can obviously go back to the days before that, to 10.000 BCE before the days of the first farming revolution. We were very much in harmony with nature those days, but I doubt you will find many people willing to trade their current comforts for that harsh reality, and that is for the best as this lifestyle can only sustain a fraction of the current population, which is why human population only started growing exponentially after that revolution.
No one’s arguing that capitalism isn’t an improvement over the past; but that doesn’t mean we have to stop here. We went from hunter-gatherer to kingdoms, from feudalism to mercantilism, then on to capitalism. So if capitalism isn’t ideal, let’s keep moving; let’s find the next system. Socialism has never had an opportunity to grow without being crushed by existing and established forces, and yet it continues to spring up over and over again no matter how many times it’s crushed. What if it were allowed to operate, find its own flaws and fix them, perhaps even collapse or succeed on its own merits, instead of being hit by a coup or locked up in a Cold War under a dictator?
@@TheCrazyCapMaster That is fair enough. The only issue is that I know from experience that changing a culture is extremely hard to achieve. Given the short time we have to save the planet, (ecological) socialism isn't going to be the solution, since it simply will take at least a century to get the worlds culture and thus their voting behaviour moving in that direction.
@@TheCrazyCapMaster Socialism functioned for thousands of years and was practiced by indigenous peoples across the globe. It was replaced when agriculture allowed for specialization within hunter gather economies.
I've never seen these green fields in Havana and most recent news coverage on this comes from Cuban and Venezuelan media outlets. Where do you have the information from? The issue is that at least in Havana, the people are not motivated enough to work in agriculture. The pollution of the beaches and streets is also a growing problem. It is difficult to get garbage cans but it doesn't mean that you throw your stuff into the ocean. The local markets offer fruits and vegetables but the quality is devastating! The soil itself should be fine and they have a relatively easy access to water. However, the goods remain small and it seems that wherever they have it from, the good stuff gets delivered into the hotels. There has always been a class system in Cuba: 1. government officials, 2. tourists and 3. the ordinary citizens. I was in a so called 5* hotel recently and even they had difficulty to get a variety of food. This year might become worse as tourists decide for other countries to visit. The Cuban government is solely counting on the support of its allies like China who will only hand out credit. The biggest rade partner of Cuba are the USA. Canada is also a big trading partner who might deliver their "rest" products. Havana is a city with a good supply system. I went shopping for food and kitchen supplies. The prices are up due to the inflation. I saw empty shelves in several supermarkets from different districts. Some people do not realize that the embargo does not equal that the Cuban government cannot buy anything. They have means to do it and obviously trading partners of a high calyber. Just think of the people in small villages! My people in Havana start to look stressed which might be a result of the lack of food diversity. Years ago I visitied a family on the countryside, maybe with a population over 200 citizens. Back then they already had basically only pork and some fresh fruits and vegetables. They had to drive miles to the next bigger cities because the supply chain wasn't effective nor do people in Havana care about the stuff that they could send to all the other towns. One example: Canadian apples! My relatives and I stood there for almost 1 hour(!). The apples were counted. You could get as many sacks as you want but the content of each sack would be the same. The clerks would also select which apples you get. People were super aggressive and needy. They didn't have enough material to carry. Almost everyone bought several sacks, like 40-50 apples. According to my cousin (who is rather regime friendly) they do it to sell the apples on the Black market as apples are exotic in Cuba. However, they use beasically all the apples in Havana and bigger cities because of the demand. A system where each town gets apples isn't existing... Sometimes I believe that most of you who talk a lot about Cuba have never been there. Interestingly, most of you don't want to live there either. Socialism feeds governments as well. Ever thought about it?
Love this video, if we made things to last and be recyclable that would be a great start. All packaging should be recyclable. Food and housing should be free with health care. Then we could begin healing the planet, we can then look at the starts mining asteroids and dead worlds. We could then look at AI to help and spread our life amongst the starts we could be the life bringer to the starts how cool would that be humans could be the species that brings life to the universe
I am from a former socialist country (Czechoslovak Socialist Republic) and literally no one had such an environmentally unfavorable policy as the socialists. In history classes, we learned about man-made natural disasters in our country. All but one (Gudron lakes from WW2) were caused by socialists. Their megalomaniacal waterworks projects flooded forests and villages, their hydroelectric plants harmed aquatic animals, farmed animal meat was full of antibiotics, some species died out completely because of socialism. "Ecosocialism" is absolute nonsense, socialism and environmental politics are opposites.
I do understand what you mean but when we study capitalist countries, we see all these things happening just because of money, profits. The word "Ecosocialism" represents something new. There is no place in the WORLD living like that right now. We are writing new history here.
no new economic system just regulate capitalists and companies with rules to be more eco friendly etc. with a good welfare system. Literally what we're doing in most of Europe. There, problem solved.@@coolioso808
I confirm that. Experiment in Chernobyl is a part of this terrible list. Our perents had know about khatasrophe from capitalistic countries by radio... Antihuman Soviet sistem didn't inform people for save their health
I find it really interesting that while watching this video I got an ad about a company that produces plastic items and their slogan is "We need plastic".
I was intrigued by the title, but this video seems premised on our “capitalist agriculture” being responsible for damage to our soils (the implication being that free market forces are incentivizing damaged soils). What’s missing from this video is that our agricultural sector is a highly planned and subsidized industry. The US Federal government decides what we need more or less of and dolls out the cash as necessary. We have been intentionally subsidizing this kind of agriculture since at least the 1930s even though it would otherwise be cheaper now to use “no-till”, cover crops, and other environmentally friendly approaches. “Socialism” usually means more central planning in practice. I didn’t make it all the way through so I don’t know if the author is suggesting that MORE government intervention would fix this or if they’re advocating some other strategy. If you want it to change, you can already use the democratic process to lobby for change. I thought this was the goal of democratic socialists. Go use the democratic structures!
As nice as this sounds, good luck getting rid of human greed. Greed has been the driver for humans forever; whether it be land, money, power, fame. Greedy and selfish people will always end up on top, even in a society like this. That's just the way it is. I don't consider myself a greedy person, but deep down there is always something that will bring it out of me. Think about if you had money in the bank, a small house, car... now people tell you none of that is yours anymore and it's for the people. As someone without those things, that sounds fantastic that we all get to share - you're gaining something. If you already had it, you're now losing something, which nobody who owns something wants. I would love a socialist society, but I fear that without something to gain, there will be an extreme lack of progress.
Equality is progress. Iphone 18 is not. Peace is progress. Leather seating in my new car is not. It's all about taking a few steps back and gainig perspective over the things that really matter and the things that don't. Owning your house is a basic need and that can be achieved for everyone in socialism. It can not be achieved in capitalism.
Towards a Theory of Social Reality SARM ● Subjectivity: Human Well-being ● Activities : Ecosocialism ● RELATIONSHIPS: State, Class, Fa.mily ● MEANS: Cultural Biological Physical
What would be mechanically different in socialist society to guarantee ecologically smart planning? if this is a representative democracy, representatives would be focused on short term gains. If you're looking for a mob rule anarchic socialism, that can still result in bad outcomes if people are misled, especially if there's no established constitution or laws bounding what can be made law of the day. Just because an economy is planned, doesn't stop people being greedy and foolish.
we are looking for mob rule anarchic socialism. people have every reason to establish institutions and investigate bad parts of their systems. non state organisation has an advantage of adaptability, where failing institutions can be discarded by simply people leaving them, and not have them weigh on the whole territory like the US supreme court, leading to more effective organisation. if we find that lack of constitution makes problem we can make a constitutions but there's no reason for that
The Chinese form of socialism is not what most liberals in the west would want but they are one of the few countries that have done anything substantial to combat climate change. Also the x year plan can be implemented in representative democracies and would actually combat climate change.
@@zuz-ve4ro No, we aren't. There's no adaptability, because there is no "anarchic non-state organization" that has the confidence of any population or the power to do anything. You are shoehorning in an extra step that makes accomplishing anything impossible and will inevitably attack any actual socialist government when it tries to implement eco-socialist policies. What you are describing is not what most eco-socialists are trying to do.
".. a cheap and simple government - a constitutional tyranny. One in which the government was *forbidden to do most things*.. and the dear people, bless their black flabby little hearts, were given no voice at all. I didn't have much hope for it [..] I was young [..] thought the setup might last a century or so.." (Heinlein, Time Enough For Love - emphasis added). Seemed appropriate. Discuss.
🍂 Where do you fall politically? (And, if you're up for sharing, how do your politics inform the way you approach climate action?)
🔗Get 40% off Nebula using my link: go.nebula.tv/occ
🌲Watch the bonus video on the USSR's ecological impact on Nebula here: nebula.tv/videos/occ-how-environmentally-destructive-was-soviet-planning
📽Watch the full interview with the authors of Half-Earth Socialism on Nebula here: nebula.tv/videos/occ-an-interview-with-the-authors-of-halfearth-socialism
Economic Neoliberal fascist white supremacist authoritarian anarchist
Deleting comments huh??
I'm already subscribed to Nebula, I come here for the comment section.
My politics don't inform the way I approach climate action.
How I approach climate action informs my politics.
@@astronics
Jokes on you, I can still see what you wrote. Imagine being an unironic white supremacist in the 21st century.
"The goal of oppressors is to limit your imagination about what is possible without them so you might never imagine more for yourself and the world you live in." That quote by Ashley C Ford was the highlight for me. The problem I feel and see moving forward is just the massive scale at which change needs to happen. It's hard enough to align my own lifestyle with the values I profess, let alone bring about deep structural change to worldwide systems.
That is why, my friend, devoting at least part of our time and energy to participating with others in building movements which generate substantial impact is what we need to do now. It's not possible for these challenges to be met and resolved effectively on an individual basis. And believing, whether consciously or unconsciously, that is what we have to do, that this is the only way open to us, is a direct product of the way we have been programmed by a capitalist-dominated world. No one can do this on their own. 👍
@@TheFlyingBrain. To be fair to capitalism, the reason it dominates is that not everyone feels oppressed by it. It can allow someone to trade something of no value to them (such as if have grown more than the local area actually requires), for an amount of money that can be later used to obtain something else. (likely replacement of soil nutrients used to produce what was grown and removed from the growing area)
The problem arises in short-term capitalism. The dead don't make any money to spend, so long-term capitalism does try to remain sustainable. But short-term capitalism is just about making as much as possible, as fast as possible, completely selfishly. This is why capitalism has to be responsibly restricted, to keep it from greedily exploiting something for short-term gain.
@@lily9025you have stated the important facts, why does it need explaining?
The explanation is simple though, what we are doing to the atmosphere is making the oceans more acidic & warmer faster than evolution can keep up so things are dying.
Not to worry though, after we've killed ourselves off the world will spend the next few thousand years rebalancing itself & will survive just fine without us.
"It's hard enough to align my own lifestyle with the values I profess, let alone bring about deep structural change to worldwide systems."
Yes. We got a word for that. It's hypocricy. If I'm being kind.
When such a belief/ ideology is system-wide, it's called much worse names than that. Just 1+1=2.
@@TheFlyingBrain.What's that? Guillotines?
*The choice is literally just:*
1) Smaller economies focussed on peace, stability, health, happiness and planet healing.
2) Business as usual, GDP/growth at all costs. The costs being, human wellbeing, happiness, health, and the total ruination of the planet upon which we depend.
You'd think the choice is easy, but we are not governed by people willing to make the easy choices...
So why don't YOU start a co-op in the United States?
@@youtubesucks1499 So why don't YOU maybe think that not everyone can or should start a business (co-op or otherwise), that co-ops aren't always enough and some people, ya know, don't live in the friggin US!
Assumptions much?
@@youtubesucks1499hierarchy is more efficient within capitalism. "entrepreneurs" due to their dictatorial position in the firm can more easily extract value for the investors, therefore cooperatives can't compete on dictatorial markets
Or it is keep your iPhone that was designed and made by a capitalist company or drop it and stop 0.00000003 gram of co2 going into the atmosphere
I chose #2
The reason Cuba uses Oxen instead of tractors is because they are literally under embargo and can't get access to replacement parts or petroleum. Its also why they still have cars from the 1950s still running.
They didn't do it because they thought it was better for the environment. Draught animal farming is more labor intensive and produces lower yields. They did it because it was either they used Oxen or they wouldn't have food period.
This isn't a desirable outcome. The PRC has huge swaths of land occupied by peasant farmers who use animals to pull plows. The government has spent the last 30 years trying to get modern farming equipment for the countryside, literally the opposite of what Cuba had to do.
dude the embargo has have many restrictions removed, trade is only made restricted or banned in the united state and no where else.
@@handsomeboi3767
Imagine if Canada or Mexico was forbidden from trading with the US. Do you think either economy would be doing well? They wouldn’t.
They’d still have trade with Europe, but it’s more expensive both to sell and to buy. For a country that’s already economically underdeveloped, that is a huge deal.
Florida, home to one of the largest commercial ports, is less than 200 km from Havana. Trade with the US would be faster and cheaper. But instead, they rely on Russia or Europe, who charge significantly more.
The whole point of the embargo was to do this exact thing. It worked, Cuba is less developed than near peer countries.
" ... is because they are literally under embargo"
complete and utter BS!! Cuba is free to trade with any country that is not taking part in the embargo, which includes other Communist countries. It's not like there is a fleet of warships surrounding Cuba and cutting off goods from reaching it. Also - Many items are excluded from the embargo. Cuba's biggest problem is, and has always been that COMMUNISM SUCKS. It doesn't work, it never has worked, it's never going to work.
@@handsomeboi3767
The embargo is still crippling, given the way it's enforced. Removing restrictions only helps on paper for the most part.
@@gmodrules123456789 is like you are a highly educated cuban or a very knowledgeable person, many cubans do not know this facts let alone people outside the country
The Scottish Government has said that they are aiming for a wellbeing economy, not based on GDP, but on human health and happiness.
Scotland 🏴 sounds like a fine place. The few Scots I have met were just the most wonderful people 🥰
Bhutan policy
I lived in Scotland in the West Highlands for 2 years and I must say I loved it and it was definitely more egalitarian minded, but the problem was too much was still in the control of Westminister. Scotland needs its independence, but don't start me on that whole Brexit scam that swung the last independence vote the wrong way :(
@@jpsilverplaylists exactly independence is what Scotland needs
be careful not to be fooled by neoliberals focusing on individual happyness, without abolishing inequality through capitalists.
I've recently been entirely disillusioned with capitalism and find it pretty much impossible to carry on participating in it, which is a bit of a problem being a self-employed contractor and finding it hard to reconcile that with still having to make a living :( I'm actually quite disgusted and repulsed by our society, and I live in South Africa so the inequality gap is even bigger here than in US or UK. And the worst of all is our alleged governing party is / was / claims to be a leftist pseudo-socialist organization, but is really just a monstrously corrupt gang that is 100% driven by an insatiable hunger for taking money
Being a self-employed contractor is probably the least bad way to participate in capitalism. You can decide what happens with the money you earn, instead of it being hoarded or spent on things that will continue to cause harm.
What's important to remember is that even though the system is awful and exploitative, the work we do often matters to others, it's rarely completely meaningless. It's also important to recognise that in the cracks of where the system fails we can grow the roots of a better one.
Your advantage as self-employed is that you can decide what to do with your company's money. Maybe invest in local projects to help disadvantaged communities. Maybe fund education. Maybe fund worker's rights associations or even found or fund a political party that can be trusted to act responsibly.
Nihilism will not change the world, acting for change will.
On socialism you just work you never get paid and you can't start a bussiness capitalism gives more opportunities to everyonem
We are all compromised under this system - don't feel bad for having to continue surviving under it.
@@portvcale Do you realise how "a bot made by a corporate PR department to spam internet comment sections with tired cliches" you sound, in the world where everyone can see the fallacy of that ideology?
Imagining the level of individual participation in government necessary to make eco socialism a reality is difficult. Does anyone else feel that one of the main issues with our current system is the lack of the average person’s involvement in the political process?
I see political participation as the biggest problem of democracy at the scales of current national populations and representative democracy greatly suffers from it. Surely, modern technology can facilitate the engagement that the lack of it hinders.
@@artiaher8693 I think the problem with modern technology is that social media is most of it. and it's an echo chamber meant to divide people on trivial problems like these.
A lack of democracy, which means a lack of socialism.
Our government is like having narcissistic parents. They make decisions that benefits them only, lies to us, emotionally and physically abuses us, poisons us, let's others hurt us for own gain, pretends to love us but uses us instead. This is why we have so many mental and physical problems, look what having narcissistic parents does to you. See similarities too? We need caring parents that also care about the future generations and the environment. I'm so done with our musty dusty government puppeteers and its puppets. What good is wealth if everything around you is suffering and dying?
I would love to be part of a participatory democracy government but I think it's a hard pill to shallow initially for most Americans.
who would've thought that profit over all else includes overlooking our own survival.
Edit: neoliberal coping is actually hilarious, please don't give these people any attention, since that's clearly what they want. who else besides trolls would click on a video about socialism from a channel that exposes how capitalism and it's rhetoric, lies, etc. kills our planet?
Karl Marx, Karl Marx thought that.
@@gardenerofthegalaxy Which is why he has been suppressed ever since.
Why would you take all the financial risk and open a business not to make a profit?
What entrepreneur is going to do that?
@@youtubesucks1499 Nobody. That is why the system is the problem. This is the entire point of the original comment.
@@youtubesucks1499 In order to have an income and pay off your loans.
Profit is what is left over after all of your expenses are deducted, including your income and investment loan money. Most businesses are simple mom and pop stores and single famliy farms.
Huh, algorithmically aided socialist planning to fight climate change and make the world a better place you say?
What a coincidence, I'm currently in a computer science and software engineering programme at uni because I want to learn what I need to try making very nearly exactly such a thing.
Hopelessly ignorant.
Same same. That's not why I initially got into computer science, but it's definitely one of the bullet points on my agenda currently.
No, you are just hopeless and projecting onto others. Don't worry, just obey your masters and keep your head down. You'll be fine for the most part. People don't really live that long in the grand scheme of things. @@derrickcox7761
I think some good places software engineering can be used for those goals, is to turn "big data" toward better informed resource logistics as well as "telepresence"/remote work technologies. Data science is heavily used to inform about the effects of climate change, but it doesn't seem to be used as much to inform how to solve the logistics of efficient distribution of resources to fight it. Tech related to remote work reduces commuting, increases opportunities (both for workers and for employers), and allows a human brain to puppeteer machinery instead of less trustable A.I (due to "black box" nature of neural networks).
We can't solve today's problems with the mentality that created them." ~ Albert Einstein
from 1975 to 1979, communist Cambodia emitted close to zero industrial carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, and like you suggested would be a good thing in the video, everyone lived on farm lands instead of feeding the city. of course, everyone was equally poor and millions had nothing to eat thanks to the centrally planned economy and redistribution of wealth. As a Cambodian i am very skeptical of any grand solution that places socialism as the main driving force. I understand capitalism as it currently is does not take care of people well, but please do not repeat the mistakes of the 20th century by going back to soviet style socialism.
Yes, the issues was that they shook hands with the transnational business interests, essentially becoming capitalist and caring about profit, not quality of life.
Why communism and anarchism were usually persecuted in those countries during those regimes.
I agree with you i just want to add something to the discussion, capitalism (or the free market) is actually a net positive, both economically and morally BUT there is always corruption in the government, the larger the government the larger the corruption which means that after having a centralized economy in cambodia (large government) there were many crooked politicians who under the guise of "capitalism" sold their country and people's livelyhood for their own interest, never letting the true free market actually develop.
Maybe you agree or dint i would like to hear your opinion on this.
Socialism might repeat the mistakes of the past or not, but capitalism repeats its own mistakes again and again and again....
So, when the revolution comes, 20% of the population will be expendable stepping stones to achieve net zero?
Masaya, I agree with you. People don't anderstand how many people was killed by communists in ussr for their social experiment. No freedom, total terror
There's something ironic about putting an educational video about the environmental destruction of the Soviet Union behind a paywall when its intended purpose is to teach the masses about how we can avoid similar mistakes in the future.
They dont deal in reality, they are selling you a delusion
Let's learn about socialism by engaging in capitalism. 😂
Literally anything could work without corruption. The problem with our laws today is that they're doing exactly what they were written to do.
Don't blame the player, blame the game. It's a systematic problem.
@@robinbreeds9217 no, it isn't. UK hasn't had a popular revolution, so it isn't socialist. You may be talking about a social democracy and the welfare state, but that's MILES away from a socialist country like Cuba, China or Noth Korea, for example
its honestly not even that hard to perform the actions needed to achieve sustainability, whats monumentally hard is getting the people that need to agree, to agree to plans..
You are so right, it isn’t as hard to do the action, but the higher ups don’t do it. So maybe we need to move ahead without the higher ups? One Small Town Contributionism is community by community and aims for prosperity and sustainable abundance for all in that local region. It really can be done.
@@coolioso808 the issue is that to start a town you need to raise a new governing body, with a mayor and all, otherwise, the land youre settled on is under jurisdiction of the nearest major settlement. if they dislike your ways of living, they'll shut you down.
@@xirensixseo One Small Town is not at all about starting a new town on some land in the boonies, no. It is about using current town infrastructure, people and resources to co-create and share the abundance and prosperity we can create when we work together, without waiting on Mayors and Councils to agree on everything. They may be aware and somewhat involved in this community co-op network, but the OST community can democratically elect their own People's Council and come to collective decisions that way, still going through the legal process in the town to acquire land, resources, etc.
Most modern places in the world have some form of worker co-ops or non-profits, so that is going to be legal. The strategic difference with OST is that it is integrated across all sectors from food to energy to clothing to housing, etc. and most labor is freely done by volunteers (i.e. contributionism). That keeps expenses very low and abundance can be easier to generate, as well as profits that go back to the community at least 60% share.
If you have other questions or concerns on this issue, feel free to ask. It's important to go through these issues to find viable solutions.
We should apply Democratic centralism in a sociallist state, just there will something be done about us destroying the planet.
Fck yo plans.
It is very apparent that barely anyone in the comments section has picked up a single book
Urban gardening might look nice on paper, but in reality plants grown in polluted environment such as cities, with their heavy traffic and industry, accumulate the pollutants in their own organs, either directly from the air through their leaves, or indirectly from the soil, which then accumulates in our own bodies through our food. Raised beds does not eliminate this problem. (Unfortunately we also suffer from this same pollution by the very act of breathing)
That is a natural filtration process. Sounds good to me! By the time it affects someone, will anyone really be able to prove that it was that versus usual lifestyle and old age stuff?
I'd still think it's worth it if it's coupled with greater plans. Obviously an ecological plan would include decreasing air pollution in cities through things like incentivising electric public transit, enviromentally less destructive heating systems, etc. And during the transitional process having polluted food is still better than having no food.
I personally have started putting native plant beds in spots I don’t trust the soils for human consumption! Hoping some form of bioremediation takes place, that the plants will stabilize pollutants so they don’t filter out someplace else, and if the plants are able to remain healthy enough hopefully they will provide habitat and food for my local wildlife that’s suffering from a lack of both.
Urban gardening functions as nothing but an ideological self-delusion. Photosynthesis requires vast areas of land that is not available in cities. The odd chili or lime grown on a balcony has no meaningful caloric value and does not make anyone even one bit self-sustaining. Carl Folke et. al. calculated that cities require land 500-1000 times the size of the city itself for its metabolic consumption and to be able to assimilate the waste it produces.
00:04 Capitalism is driving ecological collapse
02:55 Capitalism disrupts the natural regenerative cycle, leading to ecological imbalance
05:52 Ecosocialism advocates for an economy prioritizing well-being of all people and the planet.
08:53 We need vibrant visions and debates about the future world under socialism.
11:43 Gosplant: Algorithmic planning tool for ecological society
14:26 Eco-socialism aspires to global egalitarian redistribution and respectful management of human interaction with nature.
18:04 Ecosocialism and the example of Cuba's organic farming
20:50 Cuba's socialist agricultural revolution transformed the country.
23:40 Cuba's socialist organization represents ecosocialist degrowth in action
26:21 Advocacy for sustainable transportation and harm-reduction strategies
28:48 Support Our Changing Climate through Nebula
Capitalism is driving ecological collapse
- Soil degradation is a result of capitalism's pursuit of profit and capital accumulation, leading to ecological collapse.
- The relentless transformation of nature into marketable goods disrupts the natural cycle of production and reproduction, resulting in the degradation of soil health and ecological imbalance.
Capitalism disrupts the natural regenerative cycle, leading to ecological imbalance
- Under capitalism, peasant farming is replaced by wage-labor system, disrupting the return of soil nutrients
- Ecosocialism is proposed as an alternative that prioritizes humanity and nature over profits
Ecosocialism advocates for an economy prioritizing well-being of all people and the planet.
- It calls for a worker and peasant-led revolution to rip ownership of production away from the elite and put decision-making power into the hands of the masses.
- Ecosocialism specifically emphasizes a democratically planned economy based on social and ecological constraints.
We need vibrant visions and debates about the future world under socialism.
- Half-Earth Socialism calls for a socialist planned economy that focuses on land preservation, minimizing emissions, and a good life for all.
- Socialist planning is crucial in the context of climate change to understand what actions are necessary at all levels.
Gosplant: Algorithmic planning tool for ecological society
- Gosplant uses linear programming algorithms to create broad plans for cutting emissions, rewilding land, and maintaining a good life.
- The plans created by Gosplant are disseminated, debated, and transformed at global, national, and local levels, being subject to constant motion, transparency, accessibility, and debate.
Eco-socialism aspires to global egalitarian redistribution and respectful management of human interaction with nature.
- It advocates for public ownership of the means of production and decommodification of social life globally.
- It seeks to mend the metabolic rift of capitalism by embracing replenishment over extraction and heal the broken relationship with the land.
Ecosocialism and the example of Cuba's organic farming
- Ecosocialist manifestos emphasize communal stewardship, ecological production, and anti-imperialism as key throughlines.
- Contemporary example of ecosocialism in action: Cuba's transition to organic farming during the Special Period after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Cuba's socialist agricultural revolution transformed the country.
- Isolated from trading partners, Cuba adapted with initiatives like farmer to farmer knowledge sharing and urban farming.
- By emphasizing sustainable and permaculture-oriented systems and prioritizing food access, Cuba successfully built an ecosocialist agriculture.
Cuba's socialist organization represents ecosocialist degrowth in action
- Cuba deepens connection between people and land through agroecological and urban farming cooperatives, increasing literacy, food access, and minimizing fossil fuel use
- Ecosocialism requires the long collective struggle of the working class and peasants taking control of production, possibly involving revolution and starting in countries like India and the Philippines
Advocacy for sustainable transportation and harm-reduction strategies
- Advocacy for safe, accessible, and electrified public transit, and extensive bike infrastructure.
- Examples of harm-reduction strategies such as blocking pipelines, defunding the military and police, and advocating for a four-day work week.
Support Our Changing Climate through Nebula
- Get early access to videos and exclusive ad-free content
- Support a community of educational creators
If all we need to do is solve climate change, then why do we also have to completely change our economic system?
Or if climate change is such a massive issue that we can barely solve it with capitalism then why would we also add on the extra difficulty of changing our economic system to socialism?
I've noticed a lot of contrarian socialist / leftist / progressive opinions being put forward lately that claim to have answers to what ails us. But never really seem math out the reality of what they're asking of us. Personally I don't want to have 20 years of fighting to establish the new socialist revolution only to then be able to rebuild the lost technologies that will let us beat climate change...
@@FruitcakeElemental-dv1lu Basically it's because Capitalism is the root cause of the whole disaster, and it gets downplayed most of the time.
Why should completely change our economic system?
Because it's inner workings are harmful to all of us, overworked employees have severe health risks, underfunded education systems make students miserable and limits there education and to our concern the overgrown industries (meat, plastic, etc.) harm the enviroment and you can keep going finding awful society problems related to the capitalist model.
Math out what they're asking of us:
Our world needs direct action, people on the streets fighting against this system with protest, sabotage, etc. Organizing with your community for better helping itself and those around.
I don't know if Socialism is the best course of action for this, but it's significantly better than capitalism. My question is; Why should we entertain a poison which harms us so much?
@@FruitcakeElemental-dv1lu Because the premise of this video is that climate change not only can't be stopped due to capitalism, but is a side effect of late stage capitalism. We are in a world where social responsibility is far outweighed by the ability to turn a profit. We are fighting an uphill battle against climate change just to be beaten back down by the thing that created it- greed. These companies stomp out legislation that would make them change their habits with lobbyists, they stop unions from growing to keep their workers doing what they want rather than what the workers want - which is historically the socially responsible thing- and most of the people killing the planet won't be alive long enough to feel the worst of it. They are just running up our total and leaving us to pay the bill with no money because they have horded it all and parked it in assets that can't be taxed. Capitalism is the problem, climate change is just the side effect.
Many economists who aren't stuck in the capitalism is life bs have agreed to this and much of what scientists have recommended to push back the effects of climate change is targeted at these companies that are just trying to turn profits. If it weren't a problem with a capitalism, it would have solved it. But the profiteering keeps holding us back.
Your initial question already shows you've understood nothing. The economic system *is* at the root of climate change and our inability to stop it as well as a plethora of other societal issues. "Personally I don't want to have 20 years of fighting" says it all, I'm happy for you that you don't have it bad enough and sorry you're so selfish that you have no interest in making the world better for everyone and future children.@@FruitcakeElemental-dv1lu
Cuban agricultural socialism has led to famine in the 1990s, after the USSR collapsed. The result? Two million people took to improvised boats and floated to the USA. Visitors to Cuba report that food insecurity and malnutrition continues.
Economics is another word for Exchange and how we go about exchanging is really really basic and important to understand. What gets measured gets managed and what gets managed gets done. Using numbers to give us feedback about what we put into and take out of the economy is a very powerful feedback process,
previous communist experiments have also promised that more planning and control will get better economic results but they've delivered only more government oppression through every tool given to them
Otherwise known as supply and demand. And the capitalist system allows lobbyists to decide what we should be demanding which tends to be anything other than the necessities of nature.
Economics is not another word for exchange. They are two completely different words. Exchange is involved in the process of economics but when money can acquire worth just by sitting in a large pool then where is the exchange taking place? It's basically being stolen from the ground worker. There are a lot of creases and pitfalls in capitalist economics. Not least the problem with the idea that the wealthiest can get wealthier just by being wealthy whilst the poor get poorer just by being poor.
Capitalism isn't economics. It's a smash-and-grab by money-driven ignoramuses completely ambiguous to societal and environmental equilibrium.
@@Ominousheat if you ever had capital, you'd know that you'll be losing capital if it just "sits in a bank". To grow capital you must spend to safeguard it from theft, invest it in assets whose value risks instead of falls etc.
Regarding market deformation, socialist governments (which are just as or more corrupt) decide on what we should be demanding and supplying, so that is much more market distortion obviously.
@@chris-2496 I asked where was the exchange made concluding it was taken from the ground worker. Yes, it can sit in a bank for a long time before any management may be needed.
And back to my first point free markets are not in line with what should be demanded. They just want to make money through sales. The shop, warehouse, labourer and service workforce is doing the grunt work for the investor who, with a plethora of choices, merely has to say where they want their money put. That in itself decides the fate of many of those grunt workers. And competition in the markets will always negatively affect the pay of the middle and lower classes.
Acquiring cash in such a fascist manner is hardly an honest day's work let alone reasonable compensation for their lack of effort. Do you even know how big the disparity is between CEOs and the average worker, let alone the poorest. An average CEO's pay is 278X larger than the "average" worker. You don't have to call it corruption when it's legally allowed to be done, do you? FFS! Wake Up!
@@OminousheatIn my comment above I'm not implying the existing dominant economic system is perfectly designed or anything of the sort. I'm making a comment about the power of feedback and how money (or numbers) provide us with a basic and powerful feedback process that organizes society. Dismissing the monetary feedback function as irrelevant is not wise. Can the monetary process be modified to create better outcomes? Yes it can. Monetary reinvention is essential to creating a healthier society.
Please share citations or sources more clearly, maybe with timestamps etc on your notion site. This would allow for better and more clear communication based on your videos. Thanks for your awesome work.
there's a link to a comprehensive list in the description
@@abody499 i know and im very happy it is there, but it would be way better if the sources would kinda linked to timestamps etc. I love TH-camrs sharing their sources for academic/trust reasons, but having more precise Quotes/sources would be awesome. Or maybe im just used to reading papers and this whole academic knowledge path.
I wasn't aware youtube was part of an academic knowledge path
@@abody499 it is not and neither am i enroled in that field, but having that network of trusted souces and quotations would be quite an upgrade, for diving deeper in some references. I study pedagogy and social science and there are quite a bunch of creators in that field who work on their video essays more or less the same as on there scientific papers.
@@abody499 it sure is not, but whats the downside of applying the network of trust that a reasonable citation adds to every comunication of public replicators? Especialy in post-fact societies this would severly increase the quality of any outlet. anyway have fun
I really appreciate that you are speaking about these issues- socialism, post-capitalist ideas, and how they relate to the biosphere and our personal lives. Thank you.
The ignorance on here is astounding and frightening. Please get an education and study your history...quickly!
@@derrickcox7761 In the realm of intellectual pursuits, wherein I admittedly occupy a relatively nascent and incipient stage of proficiency and comprehension, I find myself ardently solicitous of guidance or recommendations vis-à-vis academic or scholarly endeavors that I might engage in. My enthusiasm for augmenting my knowledge base is not to be understated, albeit I must concede that the celerity with which I assimilate new information may not align with traditionally expedited parameters, contingent upon the subjective interpretation of your desire for an expeditious acquisition of knowledge.
Concurrently, I discern a presupposition implicit in your response to my prior commentary, suggesting an assumption of my lack of formal education. This inference, I must respectfully refute, as I have indeed partaken in a traditional higher education. It may be that the breadth or depth of my educational journey does not encompass areas you might consider of paramount significance or utility. In light of this, I entreat you not to eschew any opportunity to illuminate your perspectives, particularly as they pertain to domains of knowledge or disciplines you perceive as quintessential or invaluable.
I look forward to your recommendations and guidance.
Have you said that Marx said the workers are slaves? We need to tell the world that the wage system is also slavery, because capitalists say that if we get paid we’re not slaves, but that means if we get paid one CENT in our lifetime “we’re not slaves” which is insane. They also think it’s right to give all the money to a few people, which is insane. Great video! Thanks.
First time I've seen the social metabolism explicitly brought into the discussion. It's the concept that needs to be at the centre of how we plan the future. Not that I'm holding my breath...
Well, what's the INCENTIVE to open a business under your economic ideology?
@@youtubesucks1499 we don't incentivise private dictatorship.
@zuz-ve4ro I'd say the incentive is to provide a need for society, but yeah, obviously he was loading a question in bad faith. See the way he frames it using "ideology" as an implied pejorative. What such people fail to understand is that everything society does is ideological.
@@abody499 Nope. Most entrepreneurs will not put their life savings up and risk everything for the "greater good".
You think Amazon, Ring and Scrub Daddy were invented and brought to market for the greater good or to make money for the risk taker who put everything on the line?
@@youtubesucks1499 "Well, what's the INCENTIVE to open a business under your economic ideology?" Uhhh, the person who starts and owns the business makes more money than do the people who work for them--same as now. You would still occupy the same relative position as you do now in terms of your ranking in terms of the percentile of wealth compared to others, but the absolute differences between the rich and poor must shrink.
The research is VERY clear that vast economic inequality is a social toxin that ramps up pretty much every social dysfunction under the sun while increasing political dysfunction and corruption. The only way to save the planet and human civilization while not letting billions of people starve is to shrink the global economy by about 50% while making income and wealth distributions far more equitable. You may hate that if you wish, but it's the only way to avoid going over the edge of the cliff.
You are so goated for making this video, good job!!!
I will share these with friends and families, keep it up. We'll be waiting for more!
I think the organopónicos are a great example to highlight but it's important to point out that Cuba is currently going through a food crisis that is arguably as bad as the special period. So, food very much still has to be imported left and right to feed the people and yet the Party has used over half of the state budget to build luxury hotels... It's a complex affair, but the organopónicos are a step in the right direction, just not supported enough by the state
For those who need to the definitions:
Socialism is the ownership of labor, utilities and other resources, and housing by the individuals who are working, consuming and living.
Capitalism is the ownership of someone else's labor, utilities and resources, and housing.
Authoritarianism is when this ownership is held by the state.
Anarchism/Libertarianism is when this ownership is direct.
Mutualism is an Anarchist/Libertarian Socialist system where Worker, Consumer, and Housing cooperatives exist in a free market, but prevent exploitation by shareholders and owners, utilities and middlemen, and rent-seeking landlords as the workers, consumers, and tenants are the stakeholders.
Socialism is the common ownership of the means of production and distribution and democratic control by and in the interests of all regardless of gender, age ability or skin pigmentation.
There is no money, wages, buying or selling or government/state.
@@davidtildesley3197 statelessness is not a characteristic of socialism.
In socialism what rent and who gets the rent paid to them?
That’s communism
Worker centered solarpunk let’s go!!!
@@blub-tf6rt I work 12 hour swing shifts my guy
@@ricopena2053bro deleted his comment
Go Doge. Humanoid robots change the labor economy and have to potential to create abundance.
Like you say. Abrupt Climate Change can doom all of our counter actions. Let’s not lose the icecaps. SRM in its many forms is immediate temporary medication until we get back into balance. As example. A gram of sulphur in the upper atmosphere has the enough shading effect to counter (by shading) a ton of CO2. That a million to one leverage.
@@3793loop And where will all the resources to build these machines come from? Further industrialization...
Watch: Dominion (2018) - full documentary
We can't fix the past, but If the average human learns to love and reduce harm caused to others, then we could unite against the nebulous forces that ruin this earth.
Absolutely agree. Politically I'm disgusted with government. My hope and faith with the common man who can certainly govern a lot better than the egocentric narcissitic bullies that are attracted to government.
🤔 Correction: ‘eGocentric’.
You are disgusted with goverment and yet you want more goverment? Goverment that will control every step of your life?
Absolutely. Why couldn’t we administer our lives ourselves?
@@juanser.b97 that's why we have capitalism, duh.
going to assume you mean egocentric* lol
I was taking a plane ride from Pennsylvania and seeing the airlines and the airports jokes of a sustainability effort made me laugh out loud
This is why I'm such a big proponent of permaculture
Permaculture farmer here, currently located on the island of jamaica 🇯🇲 . Ty for coming to my TED talk😂🤝
Permaculture produces lower calories per acre, so you have to be willing to reduce your meat consumption significantly. Are you fine with that?
@@danielcreatd872yes, I am. I don't need to eat steak every day to be happy.
@danielcreatd872 I'm completely fine with that, but the problem is you're just plain wrong. With rotational grazing, mob grazing and other sustainable grasslands management practices, you can have almost twice as many animals per acre than continuous grazing and have healthier animals with a better nutrient profile than animals who've only eaten one feed. Plus, you can use the natural behaviors of the animals to seed and plant the area to transition into a healthier and more dense ecosystem that captures tons of carbon on its own.
@@PaleGhost69if everyone were allowed to move to this model there wouldn't need to be any revolution to any end. It would just be a natural transition out of an unnatural way of living.
🎯
“The object of the vegan society is to oppose the exploitation of sentient life, whether it’s profitable to do so or not”
Donald Watson-
August, 1945
“Veganism is…a way of living which avoids exploitation, whether it be of our fellow men, the animal population, or the soil upon which we rely for our very existence.”
Eva Batt-
1964
💚🐾✊🏼💚🌏✌️💚
I think we should take a moment to acknowledge the very hard things that will have to be unlearned by the masses before other systems can be effectively implemented. People are tired and overworked and no matter how perfect a system sounds, people are rightfully fearful of the protection of themselves and their loved ones. We need to always practice compassion for the extreme shift that people will have to undergo to understand these beneficial policies. Change is *hard*
You're right but there's a good chunk of people who just because they had a relative success with capitalism now live by it (even though socialism would help them more). At that point it's just like talking to a doll that only says "socialism bad cuz everyone starves" which is such a dumb argument
It's ironic tht you complain about people overworking, when the soviet union laborers worked longer hours and got paid less 😂
As Sheev Palpatine once said: "All who gain power, are afraid to lose it"
is he still alive?
@@eniggma9353 all I heard were whispers of him lurking somewhere in the far reaches of the galaxy u fortunately…
This short clip at 17:23 is from Töölahti park, Helsinki, Finland. Helsinki main station is just outside of view. Just wanted to point out that none of the buildings seen in the clip are housing units. They're all office buildings. Would be better if more effort was put into visual presentation.
I really love the sources cited. I feel like these videos show me visions of the future that, true enough, i couldn't dream of otherwise.
Anarchy was misused in this video. Anarchy is when no single entity rules. It’s a collective responsibility of horizontal power and organizing of society. If anything ecology and anarchy are complimentary. Ask @Andrewism or @Anark to discuss both anarchy and ecology. 💜
This is a beautiful vision/outcome. To my thinking, the critical omission is what is to be done with the immovable selfish and narcissistic who refuse to be won over by such a vision. What do we do with those who have not been moved by compassion or existential threats to seek shared wealth and well-being, those who are perfectly satisfied with accumulating wealth and consolidating power?
We need to use extreme measure I'm afraid. They are hardened because they think we are the enemy. And we have soft handed.
Ah there it is... Killing people .. the big sacrifice. Who will you choose to sacrifice then.. maybe you should ask for volunteers instead.
@@fuxan Nihil novi sub sole, I recall labor camps scattered over Soviet Union providing slaves for the state and Killing Fields of Cambodia. Was it a lesson for you? I think not, otherwise you wouldn't sing such an old song.
fuxan Lol good luck. Those of us with something to lose know what you are up to and are prepared. When it comes to finally dealing with the slow burn of urban self destruction and it's spillover, the core of left "leadership" will be persuaded to go away quietly and they will even keep their wealth, just won't be allowed near power ever again.
This is the golden question that always shows the true intentions of communists - getting power and resources even if that means killing and oppressing people who disagree.
Cruel ideology hiding under the cloak of compassion.
I'd like to witness you discussing "Cuban's access to food" with cuban people
Currently reading The End of Oil and it is fairly bleak. It's nice to have your videos showing the positive possibilities of our future.
Oil is literally a renewable resource. It's formed at a level much deeper than any fossils could ever exist due to the pressure.
How is this not bleak, this paints an extremely dystopian future under false pretenses. We don’t have to worry too much about climate change but climate degradation which can be solved much easier than we are led to believe and has been done before.
I’m not down with obvious neoliberal Malthusianism masquerading as socialism, especially when it calls for revolution in other countries because this makes any kind of diplomacy impossible. This is why Stalin kicked out the Trotskyist’s who similarly wanted a group of global intelligentsia to run the world
@@AmbitiousconspiracytheoristYeah, no.
It's a necessity. As the last 30 years carry a lesson for those with eyes open: Human beings ultimately are not constructively motivated by warnings of doom. People need a vision they can believe in to work for, as much or more than they need to hear alarm bells ringing.
@@AmbitiousconspiracytheoristCool remark. However, climate change enters the comments section.
Planning is good. Kudos to the video for including linear programming. Actually kudos to this video for a lot of things. I don't know if it's just a coincidence of videos I've watched in the last couple days but it feels like "metabolic rift" is trending on lefty channels.
The incredible part about this type of agriculture is.... it is still clearly possible for one farmer to grow much more food than what they personally need. After all, this is the basis of how we achieved population growth and various agricultural systems in the first place. The hard part is... this form of agricultural will always keep at least 25% of the population involved in agriculture, simply due to it's labor intensive type of farming. That's a tremendous amount of people involved in agriculture, which isn't bad, but it's a lot of people not doing other things. Furthermore, this agricultural class has a hard time getting out of poverty, to become what most of us would deem middle class of some kind and that would hold in a capitalist or socialist society. A person is only producing X, and if that's not $100k worth of food/year... it's simply hard to form an economic middle class so to speak. This form of agriculture is great, but needs technologies help. The great part is, we live in an era where there is rapid development of machines to assist. I have a vineyard, so I'm a farmer. 10 years ago, they were coming up with the first robots to prune grape vines. Soon, this will be on the market. 20 years from now, those will be much more common place, and this is technical enough skill that many people have thought that it's near impossible to train a machine to do such a task.
Yeah it’s quite possible that socialism has struggled so much partly because we weren’t quite at a technological level where a nation could really reap the rewards of that system. Bits and pieces have shown up here and there though; for example, Project Cybersyn in Chile, which enabled the workers to communicate with other factories and also request resources that they needed for their work, without needing to go through a manager or some other bloated corporate structure. They were able to keep their factories running in spite of the factory owners shutting the buildings down- they managed the logistics themselves and Chile saw a net increase in output during that brief time period.
So what I tend to ask now is: what if, instead of always fixating on each individual system supposedly failing on its own, we took what worked from each one and combined it with our improved automation and science of today?
@@TheCrazyCapMaster that's what we call "agriculture." The study of how these plants all grow. Over the last 20,000 years... we've figured that out fairly well. We know how plants grow well. Most of the time, it just doesn't really matter that much. Agricultural practices are dictated by economic practices. Same as everything else in society...
I mean, idk where you live, but plenty of people are already established in agriculture and farming, and capitalism takes away their work in many countries by destabilizing the use of local resources over import, which causes the agriculture that was otherwise able to provide a steady supply for it's country to lose their job and waste tons of food that doesn't get accepted into the market because international powers control the market.
@@artorhen totally true. If the production cost for raising a pepper this way is $1.00, and the production cost for someone doing it "the american way" is $.25... it disincentivizes anyone from farming this way. The only reason this is going on in Cuba is largely down to the fact that Cuba is short on food, is sanctioned to the Nth degree, has an excess of labor, and little mechanization or technology applied to the production of their food. Most industrialized nations won't adopt this model, not that it's bad or anything, but simply because.... money. You can make more money the other way... Nations that are comparatively poorer, are going to lose out to American farmers simply because they're not teched up. The teched up mega farmer in America is largely determining the price of corn for instance, and any country competing in the global market for corn has to be able to not only produce corn at a similar price point, but if they don't, they're often either relegated to giving up farming as a profession or poverty. This same phenomena doesn't apply only to agriculture either... it's most global industries producing a physical product of some kind.
@@jonathanmillnerexcept socialism removes the need ‘to make money’, because resources are shared. I know it’s hard for many to wrap their heads around, since we’ve been participating in this pursuit for decades, but would t you be relieved if you didn’t grow grapes to ensure your survival, but instead to be shared with your local community?
Good look into these ideas would be 1970s Chile before Pinochet.
The Soviet Union wasn't the most environmentally healthiest place due to the focus on their mass industrialisation campaigns, especially to match and combat the looming threat of Germany at the time. China is an example of that without the immediate threat of another country going to invade. It has demonstrated very bad results environmentally through their policies of large scale industrialisation and modernisation, both a good thing for the development of a modern society, but the next step would be to figure out more effective and less environmentally destructive means of production. China though has demonstrated that it is possible, though their results haven't dropped too largely, the plans to implement more clean energy has lead to results within China. Ever since China started their "War of Pollution" since 2014, they have seen significant drops of air contamination by 40% [According to NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH in the US] and most likely will continue this trend. They aren't perfect nor their Air is the healthiest, they still have a pretty polluted atmosphere, but the smog known to be seen in China has significantly dropped.
But to get back to my point about Chile and why I brought up the Soviet Union. Chile was building a Cybernetic System that would allow people to communicate with the state, for the state to communicate to other industrial sectors to allow for efficient distribution of labour and resources. During Salvador Allende's run as Chile's President, Chile saw great improvement with their quality of life during these policies, to ensure that the country can be ran not by the Bureaucratic decisions of the state, but by the decisions of the working class people, bringing up their concerns to the state for the state to act on behalf of the people for a far more functional and stable society.
Chile's Cyber Socialism would have definitely been a solution to the Soviet Union's Bureaucratic nature. At this point I am going to speculate, but if the Soviet Union would have still been a country today, if their brand of Soviet Socialism still persisted through the hardest points of their nation, there would have been no doubt that they would have tackled the Climate Question and implemented policies to improve the quality of the environment. Def look into Stalin's Environmentalism and his plans to transform the damage heavy industrialisation has done to lead down a path of Soviet Socialist Sustainability.
I would just add to this that it is worth noting that despite of the horrific pollution in China 20 years ago there are no Chinese cities on any of the lists of the world's top 10 polluted cities. As hopeless as it can seem these things can be improved when governments are actually committed to doing so. Socialist countries are capable of polluting with the rest of them but the difference is that within that system there at least exist the tools to intervene and repair the damage.
@@DinoCism Thank you for that valuable addition. People keep demonising China then forget to reflect on their own countries.
@@DinoCism Facts pal ! We only hope China will continue this trend and Maoists are wrong about them.
@@DinoCism The reason for this isn't because they shouldn't be at the top of that list, it's that they pay off the (I think was named Qair?) organization that posts the air quality numbers. Going by those actually familiar with China and have contacts there, like 90% of the ground water is unfit for ANY purpose and their air is so polluted that the smog affects out to Japan. In their propaganda images they've resorted to using generative A.I, and before that would ramp up the color correction so high that it would leave a blue tint over the image. Unfiltered, daytime views of China often show vast landscapes of bleak greys and browns of a collapsed local environment.
@@_Bees Hate to break it to ya, but you might want to take a look at the more recent analysis of China's economy. It's all been so state-controlled and faked, that they've even stopped releasing certain stats altogether. It's in a state of complete implosion with banks failing and both businesses and people fleeing.
We do need to plan how the survivors will live. Next to worse case scenario is that a tiny remnant carries on but in isolated communities.
The survivors will be those who came up with "ecosocialism" and every other leftist NGO invented buzzword. They have their islands and bunkers and servants.
The issue of selling Cuba's model is it is basically the same one we had before the industrial revolution where the vast majority of everyone were farmers who had to grow their own food to survive. It's massively more beneficial for everyone that agriculture be industrialized because it is magnitudes more efficient than individual gardening and has freed almost everyone in industrialized countries from what would otherwise be the compulsory career of subsistence agriculture and nothing else. Plus, Cuba is tropical, so it's able to grow food all year round, whereas the growing period for most places further from the equator is limited, sometimes severely, by their colder climates. Even if your growing season was 9 months long, that 80% of food needs met by urban gardens drops to 40%, because you are both not growing food and continuing to consume food during non-growing periods. Temperate growing seasons are more like 7-8 months, and anywhere further than that can be 5-6 months or even shorter. It's simply not feasible anywhere else. The lesson that economies should be as self-sufficient as possible to maintain individual liberty and prosperity despite shifting geopolitical dynamics is good, but Cuba's success is much more thanks to its climate than its economic system.
The first solar panel was made in 1883, the first commercial solar panel in the 1950s and the first affordable ones were available in the 70s. We coulda had solar panels on every roof in America by the 90s if oil lobbyists didn't work so hard
And Henry Ford killing the electric vehicle
@@longforgotten4823
Agreed. I do wonder how many MPG equivalent those old electric cars got though. I don't know if they could do intercity travel.
My issue with electric cars is the placement of the battery. They should have just kept it under the hood and lengthened the hood area to make a wider battery that could be easily removed and exchanged at gas stations (battery exchange stations) under 2 minutes. No charging required by consumer. The attendant charges the batteries and the customers pay a fee to exchange their drained battery for a charged battery.
If solar was so good it would have had its own powerful lobbyists. Things people actually want to buy make money without lobbyists and government force.
@@MilwaukeeF40C which is why we subsidized $20 billion for the fossil fuel industry in the United States alone. No, the free market monopoly crushes all opposition, competition, and innovation, so it can maximize its profit margins for shareholders.
With the emergence of Cybersocialism, through the algorithm of that genius that was Alan Turing, we can truly make the social economy planned, more equal, and accessible. Capitalism has run its course. It's time to change.
I'm happy to discuss and implement radical changes in our political and economic systems. And this seems an interesting idea. But you portrait it as if this is the solution. And it being such a complex problem, a bit more nuance and unceretenty would be good.
YES THIS IS VERY NEEDED! THANKS
I think your best example of a path forward was the one you outlined for Cuba. I believe your call for an uprising to create an ecosocialist future is counter productive because the media often villainizes socialism and living in harmony with our ecosystem. For this reason we need to speak about strategies to free ourselves from the being wage slaves and cultivate the advancement of cooperatives that are democratic in nature with a specific emphasis on our basic needs such as food production and housing. Through empowering communities to wrestle back our basic needs from the current capitalistic model which values profits over all else, we need to recognize that we the people are the ones who create the wealth through our labor. So why not work for ourselves through a cooperative efforts to meet our communities needs. Thank you and be well.
Then who gives a flying flute what the media says about anything? I agree with everything else here, but ignore the media.
@@longforgotten4823 Unfortunately, Trump Voters
@@MegaSnail1haha
I love how half the comments are "I think we should improve society" and the other half are "And yet you live in a society. Curious"
You sound like a very self righteous person 😢
@@stevehenry3813You sound annoying
if you have the chance, please read Murray Bookchin! Absolutely instrumental for a holistically social and environmental socialism.
26:24 this work was done by indigenous peoples, and Anarchosocialists, that strive for a consensus model of socialism
Anarchy and Socialism are on completely opposite sides of the Political Spectrum..
It's an Oxymoron.
It also feels like capitalism is also hacking the entire human society as well. Our entire worth has been determined by basically chance on what job can you get or how long are you willing to sell your own time. And all didn't make some CEO 0.000 1% richer
Algorithmic planning sounds VERY dystopian lol, regenerative farming is also growing under capitalism, intensive agriculture just does not make sense long-term, it only benefits banks and big ag. Farmer co-ops are the future, it does not matter if you live under capitalism or not. "Only when capitalism is destroyed can we build a better future" is coping and seething.
That's why co-ops is a better option as it can work already and show it is a better system and replace it.
As a Vietnamese, I find this hilarious. I still don’t understand why the world protest against China and Russia for communism, and now they’re trying to adopt socialism =))
EXACTLY. This video shows no knowledge of actual capital. “A Farewell to Alms: A Brief Economic History of the World” by Gregory Clark, which is actually brief and accurate.
Socialism and Communism are NOT the same. They are related, but socialism works, while communism doesn't.
@@freyathewanderer6359 Soviet states weren’t communist. They were socialist, building communism. The party was ideologically communist, but the structure wasn’t. Communism was never achieved due to multiple reasons, WW2 being the most influential one.
Because the west is full of rich people and petty bourgeois who had been way too comfortable with the exploitation of working classes and the 3rd world. Now that the poverty is growing in the West and Europe is facing floods en masse, a lot of them are suddenly becoming socialist.
And here I thought only Americans confused Communism and Socialism.
Make those other videos available to us on TH-cam!! We shouldn’t have to support Nebula to learn more about something so important! Stop gatekeeping!!!
It’s not gate keeping, it’s Capitalism 👍😂
I believe in organic urban farming initiatives. Monocropping and deforestation are huge issues with extremely simple solutions. More environmental regeneration efforts and offloading the production of food and consumable goods to organized communities.
If we cut more trees than we plant, and refuse to take large steps in reforestation and wildlife diversity, how can we expect it to be sustainable?
Monocropping and deforestation are what makes food cheap though. During all of history up to maybe around the last 50 years a substantial amount of people couldn't afford food, while nowadays starvation-related deaths are extremely low even in the poorest parts of the world. What you propose would be an awesome idea in a place like Europe or US if only about 70% of the population somehow vanished and we still had access to modern technology and engineering.
Your videos are so refreshing. I forget that we can actually make life beautiful in the future. You remind me that imagination is the most important tool to fight these crises.
I liked watching your denouncement of certain aspects of capitalism by using real world solutions that have already been applied and also enjoyed watching the ad for Nebula at the end.
Give Thanks for the video 🧐
I really liked this video, even though i have a different opinion on how to get to the solutions, you definitely have some really good points.
brave of you to make such a video, I love it
Brave? He makes money from this and generally only those in this vocal chamber would watch the video (aka his tribe)
Basically you have capitalism and everything that's not capitalism. Non capitalist systems require a lot of governance with all its attendant problems. Some philosophers think that the replacement for capitalism is neo- feudalism. Be careful what you wish for !!!
>Non capitalist systems require a lot of governance
Yep, and the socialists view themselves as the enlightened liberators of the working class, then they sieze power, then the power corrupts them. Every time.
Your reply is beyond ignorant. It entirely ignores the history of humans that spans for hundreds of thousands of years. Just start reading. Anarchist library is a good place to start.
@@NeonNion Yeah all we have to do is get rid of agriculture. Great solution.
I believe that in order for this to become reality, we first need a world government.
Planning is best done on a local level, the problem is a concentration of power, corruption, and planning at macro levels which get in the way of local plans (such as worker-owned enterprizes, focus groups of local issues, local self-reliance, local sharing, etc).
I agree that having a utopian vision is important to bind us together.
Our environmental problems are global. Local planning won't cut it.
I agree people should have control over the things that effect them directly, and resources should be shared and managed locally where possible. However large scale planning is also necessary. It doesn't make sense for every small town to have their own steel mill, sunscreen factory, data centre or aerospace research facility (just some random examples). The more complex the enterprise, the more far reaching coordination is useful.
How does a worker-owned enterprise even work? Not an attempt to make an internet argument, I sincerely do not understand the concept of a worker-owned production/service based org in an investment based society.
This channel has had quite the journey huh.
We have limited resources, I guess you know it. It's difficult to me to understand how to efficiently use resources with a central plan. You might argue that capitalism isn't using it efficiently either, but history has shown that it is still more efficient than other types of economic systems
This is a stunning video, will be sharing a lot. Really well done.
This is a useless comment. Why post something that doesn't add anything or even make a joke?
I'm glad you're not in charge. This is such a dramatic production. Socialized farming killed 100 million people with starvation in the 20th century when they tried to socialize it in Russia and China.
Most government involvement in the economy is a terrible idea. In the farming industry there are so many regulations that it’s nearly impossible for new farms to open up due to the insane costs.(bigger farms actually lobbied for most of those regulations to choke small farms) Not only that, but the government has laws on how much food you can produce. Not to mention all of the subsidies that shouldn’t exist if we just let the free market competition which would lead to lower prices. I would actually argue that we already have Socialist farming in the US.
I wish living decently (like a decent apartment, access to clean water and fresh food, sufficient education, good quality clothing) shouldnt be a luxury but with the price of everything shooting up to the sky (and beyond) every day, living decently seems like a luxury
Great video, as always, best source of eco- so far
We need Mutualism! Worker, consumer, and housing cooperatives!
I can't agree with Victor Wallis. Not on the base of he being wrong, but on the basis of how history showed that all socialist expiriences had been against ecological planning. China has become the least evironmental expirience in sociliast history followed by Soviet Union which had two of the 5 biggest environmental disaster on history. On the other hand Cuba is the closest country to ecosocialism we have today.
Well said! Should be common sense. Thanks for this video!
I loved your sarcasm..
@@RealLimerickman Hehe
Recently I started taking notice whenever I go to the store to buy food and non-food items how I always buy the same things and ignore like 99% of the other products, and that's just the handful of stores I go to. It made me ask myself: Who buys all the other stuff? Does all the other stuff eventually get sold? Are stores simply overstocked with stuff or have too much variety? Who's buying curry flavored camembert cheese and beef flavored potato chips? Where does capitalism draw the line?
It draws the line with what people buy. If people don't want shrimp flavored chips but they want salt and vinegar, then salt and vinegar chips continue to be made and the shrimp ones don't. It's as simple as that. Just because you don't want something doesn't mean others won't. That doesn't change the fact we need to make people pay for environmental destruction. Society shouldn't be able to just destroy stuff, destruction needs to be reflected in the price.
@bortsimpson4536 Nice, I finally found the one coherent comment. I can stop searching now
@bortsimpson4536 Nice, I finally found the one coherent comment. I can stop searching now
@bortsimpson4536 Nice, I finally found the one coherent comment. I can stop searching now
@bortsimpson4536 Nice, I finally found the one coherent comment. I can stop searching now
750W per person INCLUDING the industial energy cost for all the stuff??? That's insane.
"Add social services" which include electrified mass transit system. That's purely insane.
What about heating? How does it count in there? And cooking?
@@guy_autordie These ideas are not meant to be put in practice. If you did, the whole illusion would fall apart. Ecosocialism is a distraction to keep people from inacting realistic societal changes.
This is not gonna work. such changes don't happen overtime, the ordinary people have power to decide even now. Every buyer is voting with their money. No CEO will make a product that nobody would buy. So the problem still falls onto everyone. I think a better and faster solution is to introduce a vision, together with a plan and taxes, that would actually balance the main problem of cheap oil, which isn't actually that cheap as it causes climate change, those cause extreme weathers and extreme weather damages stuff, kills or makes people miss work at best. If all these impacts and costs would be actually calculated into everything, we would get rid of oil long time ago. But not even that happens, because these drastic solutions are very unpopular with the ordinary people and this they would vote for those, that will promise prosperity and reverting such changes. Which again speaks about the democracy. Yes we have it, however most people deciding who to vote for are deciding based on lack of knowledge and any random negative information and emotions of course. I came the whole circle and ended up, that the current voting preferences show such revolution into eco-socialism is not possible, as we can barely make small insignificant steps.
Probably if the external cost of the property rights could be internalized, that could be a great help. This would probably include the cost of pollution in accounting and some sort of carbon tax.
And how will that cost be passed on to the consumer?
very interesting video, thanks! i will have to read all of the three books you mentioned
Free Palestine
🇵🇸🇵🇸🇵🇸
🇵🇸🇵🇸🇵🇸
From the world map
🇵🇸🇵🇸🇵🇸🇵🇸🇵🇸🇵🇸
We do not even know what is happening tomorrow. How can we plan an entire economy. While in a capitalist economy you have different actors in which if one fails to predict the future (or is just more efficient) there are still others which can provide a good. While when the central plan fails, all the rest of the plan necessarily also crumbles while generating catastrophic consequences
The more we opt out, the weaker capitalism becomes. We can learn the practical skills our ancestors had, like making and sewing our own clothes, growing our own food, etc... we can make choices about our diets, our transportation, etc... We can protest, advocate, and support candidates for political power who support our values.
It isn't enough to save our world, but it is a necessary component. Let's live our values and prepare ourselves for a greener future
I have all those skills. Fck socialism.
Your work is always good. This video presents a host of important and, dare I say, revolutionary concepts. These are deep ideas that need to be heard. The content is so rich that I can imagine this video being broken up into at least three videos. On Nebula I hope that you can offer ad-free videos with even higher production values.
To present this excellent content in a more professional way I hope that you would consider abandoning the "TH-cam" style of motormouth editing which crams your content together in a "capitalist" style of condensed information that treats the viewers as merely consumers. By giving the narrator a "breathing pause" between the ideas in your narration you can allow the ideas to "land" in a comfortable way where they can be more easily absorbed by the audience. And these are important ideas that need to be able to "land."
This is how the great producers and editors give strength to their content. Watch excellent movies and watch how the actors present ideas with emotional content. Note that the camera is, more often, showing the face of an actor listening, rather than talking. This is how the emotional content and the importance of the ideas is conveyed in fine films. The listener needs a pause to consider a new idea and to absorb the novelty of it.
Great narrators will never allow their words to be crammed together without breathing space. Just a thought.
Interesting thought but sadly I don't think it's possible as it could limit the reach of the videos, as many click off if they are not constantly fed with new information.
What I would like to see, rather than various optional future ways to govern, is like to see videos in this much depth, about how to realistically actually make those changes happen.
Rather than coming up with optional future ways to tell everyone what to do, I pray for everyone to get a life. If you expect government to do things you will always be disappointed.
I think the easiest path to imagine a solution to capitalism is to just imagine vastly higher democratic standards.
Capitalism in its core is not democratic. It wants a small number oligarchs to control the rules in society. Which is progress coming from nobility ruling the country, but it should be obvious how that can't be the end goal. Even though countries like Iceland or Sweden obviously have way higher democratic standards than for example the US, the majority of society, even there, is still ruled by oligarchs. And its no wonder why. Even there, democratization just doesn't exist in the labour market, where most people ultimately spend most of their life.
Yep, which is what communist and anarchist ideologies correctly note.
We should make a video game..Idk where else to put this thought but a video game would lead to so many imaginings of an ecosocialist or even just general solar punk future. Like what if you had minecraft but the reward system was based upon ecological principles instead extraction and wealth accumulation?
All successful video games are communist. Nobody would play games that allow a small handful to take all the resources of the game, and be subjugated to laboring for their oppressors. People can simply play something else. And so they do.
Video games offer a unique test bed for what humans actually want from society. That which they would choose if choices were provided.
The populous chooses more equitable balance, because that balance offers replay-ability. A balance in the distribution of resources, so that competitive pursuits can be repeated, and groups in competition maintained.
The ideology of "competition" capitalists blatantly misunderstand and poison, is actually one in which your competitors must be given consideration, and assisted when needed. That the competition can be nothing more than friendly, and mutuallism the backbone behind the friendly competition. That victory is fleeting, but the comradery is forever.
Capitalism see's competition to remove the other competitor, and take their market share. (In the game of Monopoly, the game resets, and everyone starts from the beginning, because the game of Monopoly can't be played without an element of communism to create the replay-ability) *If you were to never reset the game of Monopoly, it would only ever be playable once.
BioShock as a vegan dystopia.
Pass, generate these changes through a personal, character building means. Changing a governmental structuring will never "fix" anything.
Ecosocialism is an important aspect. We cant abandon our world
"conventional economics is a form of brain damage." _Dr. David Suzuki
God bless Cuba and its people for defying all the oppression of imperial power and giving us tangible views of a better future while they're at it
Don't be fooled by the cherry picking of 'data' seen elsewhere that show positive measures vs the West. Ultimately, many Cubans would love the wealth and freedom the West has.
This video looks at the low productive use of farm land and the lack of machines as a positive. I don't think a world where we take time away from research, the arts, or even consumerism and instead return to ploughing the soil as progressive.
@@shaynealbert Yes, the wealth the west (and only the rich parts) has which comes from colonialism and unequal exchange from poorer countries selling their stuff cheap because otherwise they would be in a worse state, and the freedom that only the rich have, yes many cubans probably would love that, just as much as most poor people on the west (so most people on the west period) would like it too
What an ignorant sentence. This is the government who acts alone. The young Cubans are leaving and they even embrace capitalism from the USA. Right now they are in a massive crisis. Nobody wants to stay and all you hear from the socialist fans is: "Go on but we will not move to your country anyways."
Yang kita butuhkan adalah sebuah sistem yang mengayomi seluruh masyarakat di bumi ini dan yang mengembalikan kita pada hakekat kehidupan yang paling murni atau sejati.
Sudah saatnya kita memikirkan ulang apa yang sudah terjadi di dunia kita, minimal selama 500 tahun terakhir ini. Lalu dengan kebesaran hati mengevaluasi perjalanan menuju hari ini yang berakhir dengan kesenjangan sosial luar biasa serta rusaknya alam juga tata kelola bumi.
Kapitalisme ataupun sosialisme telah menorehkan sejarah panjang dengan luka teramat dalam.
Gagasan dan wacana alternatif yang bertumpu pada asas kolektivitas, konektivitas, kebersamaan, kepedulian, keterhormatan, dan kemandirian.
Kesadaran untuk saling topang agar tidak timpang dan tumpang tindih menjadi bagian krusial untuk membentuk masyarakat dunia yang penuh kesyukuran, keberkahan dan kebahagiaan.
Bahagia adalah hak dasar setiap manusia yang terlahir atas restu Sang Adi Hayati.
😊😊
The social engineers will dictate how you must live and force you to comply all in the name of "the common good." 😆
This is what Cody Wilson's "post politics" is for.
I can only shake my head at these socialist idiots who advocate for state slavery
These foos don't know
That is how it currently works under capitalism, yes.
The community would democratically decide how they live and what needs to go and what needs to be prioritised. Whereas currently we overproduce, over consume and waste. Why not let the community decide how we live instead of a small number of capitalists?
Some excellent critiques of capitalism in this video, but I sense a significant blind spot regarding socialism's tendency to devolve into authoritarianism, and a complete disregard for collapse dynamics quickly leading to authoritian outcomes. We've seen what happens when bureaucrats and the state are given too much power. Read Jem Bendell's Breaking Together, he presents a compelling case for ecolibertarianism being the way forward with ongoing collapse dynamics in mind.
Eco libertarianism? How about just libertarianism. When you add modifiers it stops being about individual liberty.
All socialists states had democracy. Just not parliamentary democracy or republican democracy.
Once you delve into how those democratic systems work you can see how they are democratic and no less authoritarian than any other democracy. UK is a "democracy" yet they had what 4-5 Prime Ministers and only 1 of them was elected by the people. In one election cycle!
USA don't get me started about how gerrymandering and electoral college is far less democratic than any socialist state, if they are democracies with their flaws then socialist countries were/are all democratic.
This is an amazing input on the ideologies of socialism. I never trully understood why there was a push towards this type of system.
Now i understands
A historian would argue that the 'capitalist mode of farming' is what enabled humanity to overcome the hunter-gatherer lifestyle that we had for most of humankind existence. It is exactly this urbanization with dedicated farming that gave us everything we have, all technology, from wheels to writing to math is due to this change in lifestyle. We can obviously go back to the days before that, to 10.000 BCE before the days of the first farming revolution. We were very much in harmony with nature those days, but I doubt you will find many people willing to trade their current comforts for that harsh reality, and that is for the best as this lifestyle can only sustain a fraction of the current population, which is why human population only started growing exponentially after that revolution.
Exactly it served its purpose. Now we replace it
No one’s arguing that capitalism isn’t an improvement over the past; but that doesn’t mean we have to stop here. We went from hunter-gatherer to kingdoms, from feudalism to mercantilism, then on to capitalism. So if capitalism isn’t ideal, let’s keep moving; let’s find the next system. Socialism has never had an opportunity to grow without being crushed by existing and established forces, and yet it continues to spring up over and over again no matter how many times it’s crushed. What if it were allowed to operate, find its own flaws and fix them, perhaps even collapse or succeed on its own merits, instead of being hit by a coup or locked up in a Cold War under a dictator?
@@TheCrazyCapMasterPeriodt!
@@TheCrazyCapMaster That is fair enough. The only issue is that I know from experience that changing a culture is extremely hard to achieve. Given the short time we have to save the planet, (ecological) socialism isn't going to be the solution, since it simply will take at least a century to get the worlds culture and thus their voting behaviour moving in that direction.
@@TheCrazyCapMaster Socialism functioned for thousands of years and was practiced by indigenous peoples across the globe. It was replaced when agriculture allowed for specialization within hunter gather economies.
I've never seen these green fields in Havana and most recent news coverage on this comes from Cuban and Venezuelan media outlets. Where do you have the information from?
The issue is that at least in Havana, the people are not motivated enough to work in agriculture. The pollution of the beaches and streets is also a growing problem. It is difficult to get garbage cans but it doesn't mean that you throw your stuff into the ocean. The local markets offer fruits and vegetables but the quality is devastating! The soil itself should be fine and they have a relatively easy access to water. However, the goods remain small and it seems that wherever they have it from, the good stuff gets delivered into the hotels. There has always been a class system in Cuba: 1. government officials, 2. tourists and 3. the ordinary citizens. I was in a so called 5* hotel recently and even they had difficulty to get a variety of food. This year might become worse as tourists decide for other countries to visit.
The Cuban government is solely counting on the support of its allies like China who will only hand out credit. The biggest rade partner of Cuba are the USA. Canada is also a big trading partner who might deliver their "rest" products. Havana is a city with a good supply system. I went shopping for food and kitchen supplies. The prices are up due to the inflation. I saw empty shelves in several supermarkets from different districts. Some people do not realize that the embargo does not equal that the Cuban government cannot buy anything. They have means to do it and obviously trading partners of a high calyber.
Just think of the people in small villages! My people in Havana start to look stressed which might be a result of the lack of food diversity. Years ago I visitied a family on the countryside, maybe with a population over 200 citizens. Back then they already had basically only pork and some fresh fruits and vegetables. They had to drive miles to the next bigger cities because the supply chain wasn't effective nor do people in Havana care about the stuff that they could send to all the other towns. One example: Canadian apples! My relatives and I stood there for almost 1 hour(!). The apples were counted. You could get as many sacks as you want but the content of each sack would be the same. The clerks would also select which apples you get. People were super aggressive and needy. They didn't have enough material to carry. Almost everyone bought several sacks, like 40-50 apples. According to my cousin (who is rather regime friendly) they do it to sell the apples on the Black market as apples are exotic in Cuba. However, they use beasically all the apples in Havana and bigger cities because of the demand. A system where each town gets apples isn't existing...
Sometimes I believe that most of you who talk a lot about Cuba have never been there. Interestingly, most of you don't want to live there either. Socialism feeds governments as well. Ever thought about it?
Love this video, if we made things to last and be recyclable that would be a great start. All packaging should be recyclable. Food and housing should be free with health care. Then we could begin healing the planet, we can then look at the starts mining asteroids and dead worlds. We could then look at AI to help and spread our life amongst the starts we could be the life bringer to the starts how cool would that be humans could be the species that brings life to the universe
I am from a former socialist country (Czechoslovak Socialist Republic) and literally no one had such an environmentally unfavorable policy as the socialists. In history classes, we learned about man-made natural disasters in our country. All but one (Gudron lakes from WW2) were caused by socialists. Their megalomaniacal waterworks projects flooded forests and villages, their hydroelectric plants harmed aquatic animals, farmed animal meat was full of antibiotics, some species died out completely because of socialism. "Ecosocialism" is absolute nonsense, socialism and environmental politics are opposites.
What would you propose then for a new economic system that would be sustainable and able to meet people’s needs and deliver quality wellbeing?
I do understand what you mean but when we study capitalist countries, we see all these things happening just because of money, profits.
The word "Ecosocialism" represents something new. There is no place in the WORLD living like that right now. We are writing new history here.
no new economic system just regulate capitalists and companies with rules to be more eco friendly etc. with a good welfare system. Literally what we're doing in most of Europe. There, problem solved.@@coolioso808
I confirm that. Experiment in Chernobyl is a part of this terrible list. Our perents had know about khatasrophe from capitalistic countries by radio... Antihuman Soviet sistem didn't inform people for save their health
I find it really interesting that while watching this video I got an ad about a company that produces plastic items and their slogan is "We need plastic".
I was intrigued by the title, but this video seems premised on our “capitalist agriculture” being responsible for damage to our soils (the implication being that free market forces are incentivizing damaged soils). What’s missing from this video is that our agricultural sector is a highly planned and subsidized industry. The US Federal government decides what we need more or less of and dolls out the cash as necessary. We have been intentionally subsidizing this kind of agriculture since at least the 1930s even though it would otherwise be cheaper now to use “no-till”, cover crops, and other environmentally friendly approaches.
“Socialism” usually means more central planning in practice. I didn’t make it all the way through so I don’t know if the author is suggesting that MORE government intervention would fix this or if they’re advocating some other strategy. If you want it to change, you can already use the democratic process to lobby for change. I thought this was the goal of democratic socialists. Go use the democratic structures!
As nice as this sounds, good luck getting rid of human greed. Greed has been the driver for humans forever; whether it be land, money, power, fame. Greedy and selfish people will always end up on top, even in a society like this. That's just the way it is. I don't consider myself a greedy person, but deep down there is always something that will bring it out of me. Think about if you had money in the bank, a small house, car... now people tell you none of that is yours anymore and it's for the people. As someone without those things, that sounds fantastic that we all get to share - you're gaining something. If you already had it, you're now losing something, which nobody who owns something wants. I would love a socialist society, but I fear that without something to gain, there will be an extreme lack of progress.
Equality is progress. Iphone 18 is not.
Peace is progress. Leather seating in my new car is not.
It's all about taking a few steps back and gainig perspective over the things that really matter and the things that don't.
Owning your house is a basic need and that can be achieved for everyone in socialism. It can not be achieved in capitalism.
Towards a Theory of Social Reality SARM
● Subjectivity: Human Well-being
● Activities : Ecosocialism
● RELATIONSHIPS: State, Class, Fa.mily
● MEANS: Cultural Biological Physical
What would be mechanically different in socialist society to guarantee ecologically smart planning? if this is a representative democracy, representatives would be focused on short term gains. If you're looking for a mob rule anarchic socialism, that can still result in bad outcomes if people are misled, especially if there's no established constitution or laws bounding what can be made law of the day. Just because an economy is planned, doesn't stop people being greedy and foolish.
we are looking for mob rule anarchic socialism. people have every reason to establish institutions and investigate bad parts of their systems. non state organisation has an advantage of adaptability, where failing institutions can be discarded by simply people leaving them, and not have them weigh on the whole territory like the US supreme court, leading to more effective organisation.
if we find that lack of constitution makes problem we can make a constitutions but there's no reason for that
The Chinese form of socialism is not what most liberals in the west would want but they are one of the few countries that have done anything substantial to combat climate change. Also the x year plan can be implemented in representative democracies and would actually combat climate change.
@@zuz-ve4ro No, we aren't. There's no adaptability, because there is no "anarchic non-state organization" that has the confidence of any population or the power to do anything. You are shoehorning in an extra step that makes accomplishing anything impossible and will inevitably attack any actual socialist government when it tries to implement eco-socialist policies. What you are describing is not what most eco-socialists are trying to do.
".. a cheap and simple government - a constitutional tyranny. One in which the government was *forbidden to do most things*.. and the dear people, bless their black flabby little hearts, were given no voice at all. I didn't have much hope for it [..] I was young [..] thought the setup might last a century or so.." (Heinlein, Time Enough For Love - emphasis added). Seemed appropriate. Discuss.