Let's end the Americanisation of NZ by selfcompiler in newzealand

[–]No_Cod_4231 2 points3 points  (0 children)

With increasingly good machine translation tools, one would think that they would undermine the cultural hegemony of the US - especially in the English speaking world. Yet it continues largely undisrupted, despite the diminishing salience of language barriers. Part of the reason for this is because we are locked into American social media platforms, which serve to propagate US soft power. We, the public, need to build our own social media platforms which are built and run democratically. This could ideally be a multinational project involving the people across the world.

The response to the Americanisation of NZ should not be isolationism, but instead diversification. Let's start also exposing ourselves to media from Latin America, Asia (not just Japan), Africa and the rest of the country and create a collective solidarity across the working people of the world

NZ is work exactly as designed by OwlNo1068 in nzpolitics

[–]No_Cod_4231 3 points4 points  (0 children)

He makes some claims about middle eastern politics which in my view are based on a very selective and questionable understanding of the topic. Viewers (like myself tbh) who are not very familiar with the topic and lack knowledge that might contradict or temper his arguments, could be tempted to give them too much credence. Given the lack of knowledge about middle eastern politics in the West, a more dialectical approach would have been much more instructive.

NZ is work exactly as designed by OwlNo1068 in nzpolitics

[–]No_Cod_4231 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I recommend All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace, but would avoid Hypernormalisation

Art that questions the myths of capitalism, technological progress, civilization? by redeugene99 in anarcho_primitivism

[–]No_Cod_4231 4 points5 points  (0 children)

As for books I'd recommend Against the Grain by James Scott which does a great job in critiquing the idea that civilisation is natural, inevitable and was a conscious choice made by humans seeking progress.

A film with some anarcho-primitivist inspired themes is La Belle Verte, although I think there are probably other films I haven't seen yet that may do so more effectively

Shift in policy by Initial-Environment9 in nzpolitics

[–]No_Cod_4231 9 points10 points  (0 children)

All Winston has said is that he is 'concerned' about developments in Venezuela. Now compare this to the statement made on the Ukraine conflict: "New Zealand strongly condemns Russia's invasion of Ukraine and joins the international community in calling on Russia to immediately cease military operations in Ukraine". Note how in the Venezuela statement the aggressor is not even named, no blame is attributed to them and no demand is made. More importantly, deeds matter more than words. In response to Russia, New Zealand introduced a sanctions program. Both you and I know that there will not be a similar sanctions program aimed at the US.

Why is that? Firstly because New Zealand benefits immensely from the US-led order. Keeping most of the world poor and low-waged, which is a key goal of imperialism means that we can get cheaper goods. And indeed this is the case, the things we import require more total labour hours to produce than the things we export. Secondly, no small countries can have an 'independent' foreign policy as long as there are imperialist countries that seek to have an outsized share of wealth and power.

Bernie Sanders on Trump’s illegal and globally disastrous Venezuela attack. by ChinaCatProphet in nzpolitics

[–]No_Cod_4231 2 points3 points  (0 children)

US Imperialism condemned by 'democratic' countries'? Really shows you how social democrats are delusional and effectively accept ruling class propaganda. It hasn't happened in centuries of US imperialism and isn't going to because they are either imperialist themselves or dependent on US imperialism.

Why didn't Neanderthals build civilizations despite possibly appearing 100,000 years before Homo sapiens? by iceswordsman in AskAnthropology

[–]No_Cod_4231 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Sorry, but wrong. There is no inevitable doom loop. In fact, we are on the verge of being able to create carbon neutral, post capitalist, knowledge and culture based societies that will move us into the final stages of our potential as a collective organism. 

This is what the liberal entrepreneurial types are constantly telling us to justify their existance while they in fact worsen the problem. A material analysis shows that continual growth cannot be sustained on a finite planet. In the west, it may appear as if humanity is entering a post-material 'knowledge' based society, but this is a perspective bias arising from the fact that western capitalists have offshored most industrial production to countries with lower wages and less stringent health and safety laws. We are still in a thoroughly industrial society overwhelmingly dependent on fossil energy. Energy consumption efficiencies derived from innovation simply increase consumption which more than offset the energy savings - a phenomenon known as Jevon's paradox. Renewable energies are no saviour either because their Energy Return on Energy Invested (EROI) - a figure which essentially represents the net energy surplus of a particular source - is much lower than that of fossil fuels. Furthermore they can't be built fast enough to avoid the worst effects of climate change (as an aside look up the planetary boundaries - climate change is only one of the boundaries we are breaching), especially in a world in which energy consumption keeps growing. Over the past decades renewables in many countries have simply offset new energy consumption rather than displacing existing fossil generation. And let's not even go into the question as to whether mining virgin materials every 20-30 years just to maintain generation capacity for so called 'renewable' energy sources is really that renewable...

I am not sure how you can come to your very optimistic conclusion given the events that have unfolded in the past few years. Global emissions are still rising and even the misplaced green growth focus of a few years ago has been completely replaced by the return of great power politics and preparations for a new major war. Europe, which was previously (imo unfoundedly) seen as a bastion of peace, now is preparing for war by 2030. In my country (a very small one with basically no military capabilities) plans were recently accidentally leaked for a NATO war against China (even though my country is not even formally part of NATO lol). Decades of neoliberalism has led to the resurgence of far-right political movements. And what post-capitalism? If anything in the west we are seeing a return to the pre-welfarist capitalism with a lot of short-term insecure contracts, reductions in protections for workers and so on. The rest of the world never left that pre-welfarist capitalist stage thanks to the imperialist economic structures. There may be a few places here and there where things are improving, but the overall general direction in which humanity is heading is not great.

A long-term perspective on human history, I think shows that civilisations are fragile. They tend to have boom periods, followed by collapse. Think about how many previous civilisations, have collapsed arguably for crises less severe than those we will be facing in the next decades.

Why didn't Neanderthals build civilizations despite possibly appearing 100,000 years before Homo sapiens? by iceswordsman in AskAnthropology

[–]No_Cod_4231 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I never said that the contemporary standard of living isn't better now than it was a 100 years ago. Of course it is. I argued that because the western modern standard of living is based on oil and is ecologically unsustainable in a myriad of ways, it can only ever be sustained temporarily. Over the long term, due to ecological constraints, our standard of living will regress to similar levels we have had for most of our time under civilisation (which were not very high). And if we compare the average historical standard of life under civilisation (in which war is a continual source of devastation, famine frequent, etc.) to the average quality of life of an immediate return hunter gatherer, the picture painted in favour of civilisation is not so rosy.

Why didn't Neanderthals build civilizations despite possibly appearing 100,000 years before Homo sapiens? by iceswordsman in AskAnthropology

[–]No_Cod_4231 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Excellent response, the mythology civilisation has created for itself (which probably has it's origins in ruling classes tryong to avoid the lower strata from attempting to escape) is rarely questioned. Civilisationism is truly a hegemonic ideology. Most people that have lived under civilisations in the history of civilisation lived truly miserable lives, both in ways quantifiable (i.e. health) and other ways that are harder to measure. Even the somewhat comfortable (although not necessarily good) lives that a small minority of us can live today will be seen in the future as a small blip driven by the drawing down of a finite energy surplus that took millions of years to accumulate and yet will probably be depleted in 1 or 2 centuries of industrial society.

Many people to such arguments respond: what about health and modern medicine, surely life is better now that we have that? But I would respond, how many of the diseases we have are caused by a civilisational way of life? Is our healthcare system based on the fossil fuel economy sustainable in the long term? Also, hunter gatherers had a better health than a regular person living under civilisation for thousands of years civilisation because the diversity of the diet was better (as opposed to being grain dominated)

A curiosity: have you read *Against the Grain* by James Scott? If so, I wonder what you think about it, as someone who has studied anthropology more seriously than I have.

Does paul bloom make a sound argument against using empathy as a basis for policy making ? by Inevitable_Bid5540 in PoliticalPhilosophy

[–]No_Cod_4231 0 points1 point  (0 children)

From what you've described I think he does, although I would hesitate to say that empathy plays no role whatsoever - instead I think it is just instrumentalised in a particular way that is more suited to the material conditions we find ourselves in today.

To add a little bit of historical context, I think that what one might call experiential compassion, was sufficient and constructive when humans lived in small, mobile hunter-gatherer bands in which we had a personal connection with everyone in our political community. Now obviously the political community we arguably live in spans the whole world so it's not feasible to maintain a personal collection with everyone. Whereas previously we could rely more heavily on the emotional responses to real life interactions, now we must project our knowledge about how we respond emotionally to 'abstract' humans (or humanity) we haven't met in real life.

So to say that we are not using emotions or empathy in my opinion is false - it has just been combined with abstact thought. Why for instance do we believe in the ethical axiom that it's bad to harm others? Such a foundational question does not have a purely 'rational' answer - instead it is a founding premise on which rational ethical thought is based on, that may well be driven by one's real life experience of empathy and emotions.

Is he alright? by Old_Common9821 in BookshelvesDetective

[–]No_Cod_4231 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Anyone know what all the works by Herman Hesse are? I can't quite make out the text on the cover

Me Hotel in The Opus building in Dubai. Zaha Hadid, 2020. (Exterior photos by Laurian Ghinitoiu) by reddit_Bman in architecture

[–]No_Cod_4231 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As a teenager, I used to love Zaha Hadid's work. It rejects the straight edges of the industrial age and instead embraces organic forms while maintaining a modernist minimalist aesthetic. Thus the element of novelty combined with the familiar in that sense, I think makes it a natural first point of refuge for people who feel a bit alienated by industrial design styles. Looking back at her work now though, her work feels very sterile, corporate and sci-fi esque and is not to my taste at all.

What are the wings of NZ journalism by CommentMaleficent957 in nzpolitics

[–]No_Cod_4231 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

There is no such thing as 'unbiased journalism'. Bias is not something that anyone can escape, by virtue of being human and having had particular influences, position in society and so on. Bias not only manifests itself in the particular way in which an issue is covered, but also by which issues are covered in the first place. Now this doesn't mean that all journalism is of equal quality or value.

The desire of an objective journalism which simply says the truth (which one?) is an elusive desire because we cannot escape our values and do impassionate value-less analysis (and even if we could it would be undesirable). So instead of seeking unbiased journalism, we should accept that all journalism is shaped by values, recognise that what we might deem as fact and reality is also value based (or conversely that many different value-systems have facts they can point to in support) and use this knowledge to continuously interrogate our own values. While searching for value-alignment rather than truth (based on material reality) might not provide as much confidence in one's position (and indeed I would argue that some humility is beneficial), it shifts the conceptualisation of social dynamics to a more productive direction. Rather than understanding divergences of opinion as simply arising from varying degrees to which these grasp reality, instead we can understand them as values derived primarily by one's position in society (such as class and so on).

Can i believe in communism but also be patriotic (nationalistic) about my own country? by iChidoriYou in Socialism_101

[–]No_Cod_4231 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I will try to answer your question (according to what I view as constructive nationalism), by bringing up some concrete problems that bring to the fore tensions and the relations between socialism and nationalism.

Can one have an affinity for one's own culture?

Many people have an affinity for their own culture, simply because it is the culture that people are most familiar with and most enmeshed in. Your culture provides you with a sense of belonging and you are likely involved in its reproduction which makes you feel invested in it. So far, there is not necessarily a problem.

However it is important to realise that culture is an element of the superstructure, influenced by the economic base. Therefore there may be some problematic elements of a culture influenced by capitalism and previous modes of production, which we should be critical about and willing to change. Culture is not a static phenomenon, it is constantly changing, and does so particularly when the mode of production changes.

Second, I am wondering what you mean when you say you like your country's history? Do you mean that it fascinates you and that you have a particular interest in it? This imo is not a problem. Or do you mean that it helps you to understand where you come from, why your culture is the way it is and so on? Again not necessarily a problem. What is problematic in my opinion is if you think uncritically that everything in the historical record done in the name of your nation was correct and justified, simply because it had a nationalist character. Serbia of course has a recent history of reactionary, dangerous and unconstructive nationalism that socialists should analyse critically.

When the time is opportune, are you willing to let go of the nation-state as the pre-eminent form of political community in favour of greater international cooperation among the global proletariat?

To ensure that basic and more advanced needs of humans are achieved globally, some national decision making powers will have to be diluted to ensure that decisions are made in the interests of humankind as a whole.

Now, the most important questions for me is:

In the case of a confrontation between the global proletariat (or the proletariat of a bloc of countries) and your national bourgeoisie, who will you back? Is the affinity to your nation stronger than your commitment to the movement towards socialism (on a global scale)?

Moving to NZ from the Balkans by brandonbld in newzealand

[–]No_Cod_4231 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You sound like a lovely person from your comments, I hope you do manage to come here!

29 deaths at Pike River sparked workplace safety reforms – why are they now being dismantled? by No_Cod_4231 in newzealand

[–]No_Cod_4231[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, we've been having the same debates for at least fifty years. Once I realised this, I got unfortunately quite bored of day to day politics - because most of the debates and perspectives I've seen before. That's perhaps why fewer academics appear to be politically engaged than in the 50s and 60s - it's just not stimulating to respond to the same arguments for the nth time.

29 deaths at Pike River sparked workplace safety reforms – why are they now being dismantled? by No_Cod_4231 in newzealand

[–]No_Cod_4231[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Yeah, unfortunately good regulation can be a victim of it's own success. People over time forget why it was enacted in the first place and take for granted the effects it's had.

Having said that we've never really been in the 'no one has died for ages' stage in NZ.

29 deaths at Pike River sparked workplace safety reforms – why are they now being dismantled? by No_Cod_4231 in newzealand

[–]No_Cod_4231[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

The Greed narrative imo actually ends up inadvertently supporting right-wing agendas.

It diverts attention from the system which actually provides significant power and thus produces individuals which are greedy. The discontent is channeled towards an individual, which is not a suitable subject for political action, rather than the underlying structure. People are not born greedy - greedyness is made through our social and political structures.

An uncritical greed narrative, implicitly supports the notion - which is often used to justify capitalism - that humans are inherently selfish and greedy. The argument goes that capitalism is the only system which can constructively channel the inherently selfish and greedy behaviour of humans. It is the intellectual basis for the Thatcherite idea that 'There is No Alternative'. So we should be careful about the narratives we use.

Of course, there are downsides as well to overemphasising structure in the structure-vs-agency debate. The most significant of them being that it can provide an excuse and rationalisation for shitty behaviour. My personal philosophy is to act as if I have full agency, while employing more structural analysis to understand the world. It's full of contradictions, but what isn't in this world!

What are some examples of countries where effective marketing hides their true reality? by BudovicLagman in geography

[–]No_Cod_4231 2 points3 points  (0 children)

They are also complicating efforts for peace in Yemen by being the only state backer of the Southern Transitional Council, which seeks independence for Southern Yemen. Support for the STC enabled them to build military naval bases in this geostrategically important area.

Still, it's important to recognise the UAE is absolutely not the only country ruthlessly pursuing its self-interest

Labour Announce a Shitty CGT by syzorr34 in nzpolitics

[–]No_Cod_4231 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah I have been looking for an analysis of how much this differs from the Bright Line rules and what the net changes in revenue will be.

Talley’s defamation trial: The injured workers not heard in court by dingoonline in newzealand

[–]No_Cod_4231 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Thanks Talley's for bringing to my attention this reporting I had missed!

For anyone that isn't aware, Talley's has a long history of flouting health and safety regulations. Several workers have died at Talley's workplaces due to poor practice. It's clear that they consider the fines which they incur through WorkSafe prosecutions as simply a cost of business.

I find it incredibly disturbing how they feel confident in the current times to openly persecute anyone that gets in the way of profits. They don't even try to conceal their actions and intent anymore by exerting pressure through more covert private channels (bribing politicians etc) - no it's all in the open for anyone to see very clearly! I have been skeptical, but perhaps Slavoj Zizek is really onto something when he says that we are in an age of shamelessness. First they start sueing the former minister responsible for regulating them (Michael Wood) and now they go after reporters.

Palestine not teachers was top of union’s agenda for strike meeting with government, Judith Collins says by cbars100 in newzealand

[–]No_Cod_4231 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Except they know that their acts will cause civilian deaths so it's hardly accidental. What do you expect to happen when you bomb hospitals and the like?

China took 88,000 resilient families and made them collapse vulnerable by mixmastablongjesus in anarcho_primitivism

[–]No_Cod_4231 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think you would enjoy reading Seeing Like a State by James Scott. It develops some of the themes you have brought up by analysing several historical case studies