Volatility

July 21, 2019

Goon Shot

Filed under: Dance of Death, Disaster Capitalism, Scientism/Technocracy — Tags: , , , , — Russell Bangs @ 5:38 am

<

 
 
I wish I’d seen this article in time to post this yesterday for the big anniversary of one of America’s greatest propaganda scams. By that I don’t mean the moon landing was a hoax. I mean that real or not, the moon landing’s primary purpose was to serve as a techno-triumphalist, anti-Gaian, Cold War propaganda stunt.
 
But perhaps the hype is starting to wear thin?
 
A recent survey of 3,000 kids found that being a YouTube star was a more sought-after profession than being an astronaut among kids in the US and the United Kingdom.
 
Children ages 8 to 12 in the US, the UK, and China were recently polled in honor of the 50th anniversary of the Apollo 11 mission, which resulted in the first person to walk on the moon.
 
Kids in the US and the UK were three times as likely to want to be YouTubers or vloggers as astronauts, while kids in China were more likely to want to be astronauts.
 
It sounds like a good sign to me if kids in the US and UK are disregarding the system hype about “space travel”, a stupid worthless endeavor which never will accomplish anything except maybe to weaponize space. (If the fossil fuels last long enough and the missiles don’t fly first. But nuclear war looks more and more likely with every passing month.) Meanwhile it sounds like Chinese kids are still drinking the techno-necro kool ade.
 
The main reason the techno-cultists and their corporate funders always give for continuing with this white elephant is that someday it will be necessary to colonize other planets, with Mars the usual candidate. This always means, “Civilization must and should continue to murder the Earth unto the total end, but have no fear about humanity destroying its own basis for life, because we’ll simply move to another planet and commence destroying it.” (Basically the same rationale as for the geoengineering idea.) It’s a purely psychopathic, omnicidal mindset of hatred for all that lives, and all proponents of space travel share it.
 
So much for the real purpose of the idea and the moral-spiritual character of it.
 
As for the practicability, the kind of space travel required to colonize Mars is physically impossible. There could be no protection against such prolonged exposure to the sun’s radiation in space. Nor could anyone transport the vast resources even the most minuscule Mars base would require. One only need look at the results of the two Biosphere projects, earthly attempts to simulate a rudimentary base on another planet or other body. These failed almost immediately, physically and psychologically. This completely exposes the idiocy of the “terraforming” idea. And those projects had the deck loaded in their favor in many ways, much like the military’s “war games” always stack the deck in favor of the outcome the brass wants. Yet like many of these war games, and like so many other things designed by those who disregard reality, the biospheres nevertheless got clobbered by reality. I doubt Mars would give anyone such an initial advantage.
 
Any such attempt, like with any other necropolitan “great work”, would hoover up vast social resources and perpetrate further ecocidal ravages on THIS planet, our one and only home (but these persons are so insane they’ve forgotten that), for the benefit only of the richest and most powerful (and some of their thugs). Much like the geoengineering notion, it would be designed to convey vast amounts of public money and power to a few of the most privileged corporations. And even if a Mars colony were possible, those are the only persons who would benefit.
 
Of course, like with such technologies as geoengineering, pesticides and GMOs, the proponents of space travel and space colonization don’t really care whether it could ever work or not. The point is to gain time for further, total destruction of this Earth, and to exult in the idea for religious purposes.
 
Fantasies of space, wherever they go beyond escapist fantasy, always mean a psychotic hatred of our one and only home, Earth who created and nurtured us.
 
So it’s a good thing if kids today no longer have the literal stars in their eyes and no longer put “astronaut” at the top of their list of What I Want to Be When I Grow Up. Of course to obsess on Youtube or any other gadget with a screen also is to become alienated from reality, alienated from the Earth, mentally inert, maladaptive in an evolutionary sense. But at least one has stopped gazing “up”, the way every misguided religion from Christianity to modern scientism (actually a Christian epigone) has obsessively done. It would be one small step for man in the right direction.
 
 
 
 
 

July 4, 2019

The Only Test Left is of Human Resolve (One Test Case)

The only test left is the test of who wants to submit and who wants to fight.

>

 
 
 
Those who are lukewarm on poison and ecocide continue the calls for “more and better testing”.
 
1. But I thought we’re already satisfied by the evidence record of many decades and all peoples that all industrial poisons cause cancer, birth defects and diverse other health evils. Anyone truly convinced of that would evolve beyond the “more testing” pathology and become an abolitionist. No abolitionist still would call for more testing, any more than an anti-slavery abolitionist would call for endless moral symposiums on whether or not slavery is evil. Those who issue such call admit they themselves aren’t sure: About whether poison destroys health, whether they really want to know how injurious and murderous it is, whether they really want to be forced to take a stand once and for all.
 
2. We’ve known many decades that animal tests are carried out in bogus ways. And when in spite of all subterfuge adverse results are found, these are suppressed or attacked. That will never change for as long as testing continues.
 
3. As a matter of science, the notion that testing on non-human animals gives information which reliably can be extrapolated to humans is dubious. As is the notion that controlled tests in a lab give reliable information for the incalculable real world. A lab test can prove a chemical causes cancer. It can never prove safety.
 
4. None of civilization’s activities and production gives its inmates any right to torture animals. But then, the poisons are designed and intended to perpetrate ecocide, so it’s no surprise that the kind of psychopaths which would commit such acts would also enjoy or tolerate laboratory torture. Those exact same researchers happily torture human subjects the same way any time they get the opportunity. The Nazi experimenters are only the most infamous example. The same kind of thing has been common in Western psychiatric hospitals.
 
Abolitionists know that pesticides are lethal poison to humans and all other animals; we know that the lab testing paradigm is unscientific and denies ecological truth; we know its practitioners and propagandists are frauds, liars, and sadists; we know that testing regimes, like every other part of the propaganda of production, are intended to support the ecocidal campaign by giving it a fake veneer of social and environmental responsibility.
 
Where it comes to the most toxic and worthless products of civilization such as agricultural poisons, the only valid position is total abolitionism. This rules out any form of lukewarm pretense that either the product or the system which produces and inflicts it has any redeeming quality. The mindset still mired in “we need more and better testing” simply displays its own ignorance, lack of self-assurance, and deep ambivalence toward the ecocidal campaign itself.
 
 
Independence day? Almost all minds remain in chains.
 
 
 
 
 

April 3, 2019

No One (Yet) Wants to Change Anything But the Climate

<

 
 
Over my years of writing about pesticides-GMOs and fruitlessly trying to find comrades for an abolitionist project (never found a single one), I’ve often observed that if I were a Monsanto hack I’d say to the anti-GMO people: “There’s quite a gap between your rhetoric about the extreme dangers of these products, and the paltriness of your preferred solutions. GMO labeling? Really? Surely if the peril were as dire as you say, you’d be calling for something rather more intrepid.”
 
This is true, and we can say the same about the climate crisis, and the greater ecological crisis of which climate change is just one part, not even the acutely worst part.
 
The science – both observed and projected – becomes ever more apocalyptic. And the gap between the science and the pathetic solutions touted by those same scientists and climate activists becomes an ever wider abyss.
 
The scientists could say they’ve confirmed that a twenty-mile wide asteroid will hit the Earth in two days, and their recommendation would continue to be: Electric cars, “Green New Deals”, “Green growth!”…Green jobs!…Keep Shopping!
 
Thus, the ultimate disaster capitalism is what they call “Green Capitalism”.
 
(Here’s a good summary of the ideology of the capitalist faction which sees a new profiteering and political opportunity within the crisis they and their fellow capitalist factions are driving as hard as they can. As the piece says, the likes of the Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg are tending a Green New Deal stable along with their more usual ones. As this propagandist of Dominion and Destruction gleefully proclaims, “it’s capitalist vs. capitalist”, and only good capitalists can and should be allowed to exist on their heat-scoured rock. But the evidence is that the rock shall rock them first.)
 
If I were a de jure climate denier (the type I describe above is the de facto denier, the climate crocodile crying fake tears, the type which acknowledges the crisis but then flips 180 degrees to claim the crisis can be met within the framework of the ecocidal civilization which congenitally causes and escalates it), if I were a de jure climate denier I’d observe that this abyss between prediction and preferred “solution” proves that all these climate activists are frauds. Which of course they are, since they’re just the other kind of denier.
 
None of them wants or can even conceive what’s necessary: Gaia and the economic civilization cannot co-exist. They are mutually exclusive. Industrial civilization inherently wages total aggressive war to exterminate Gaia, until Gaia finally smashes civilization like a bug. Civilization must go, one way or another. Homo domesticus, already in its 1945 hunkering in the bunker like Hitler, will insist on going out in the hardest, most destructive way possible. The very fact that Green Capitalism is the preferred religion of the overwhelming majority of “eco”-type persons is the best proof of this. Only a handful of Gaians, only a handful of deep ecologists will ever exist.
 
I’ve often stated the one and only one solution which in theory humanity could impose upon itself, but which in practice the Earth will impose upon it:
 
End all industrial emissions; end all destruction of sinks; work only in a way that rebuilds sinks. Above all, allow nature to resume its natural states of forest, wetland, grassland.
 
Of course there’s zero chance the civilization or any part of it will do this. Gaia herself will impose it in her time tested way. In the end, and likely sooner rather than later, Gaia will deal with this berserk global infestation the same way she’s always dealt regionally with regional infestations.
 
Civilization must go. The only question is whether humanity itself (just one of civilization’s many victims) must go extinct with it. The civilization certainly will try to take out the species itself. As we see in Brazil, the Philippines, Africa, Canada, everywhere, civilization is striving to complete the genocide of what remains of indigenous and traditional peoples before time runs out for it. It also will become more and more aggressive in trying to stamp out the rising movements from within it, movements toward community food, homesteading, any form of reskilling and adapting to a more resilient, more ecological, therefore more human way of life. Whether the civilization can exterminate the human species is the great question of our time. We who work to help the traditional nations and build new second nation movements are the ones trying to save the spirit and existence of humanity from the mass extinction being driven as the core project of the orcs, the berserkers, the psychopaths, the “civilized” hominids.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

March 13, 2019

Rabid Mammon

>

 
 
There are dives where, if a glass of beer drops to the floor and smashes, the winos will dive to lick the sauce from the tiles.
 
There are dens where, if some junk gets scattered the junkies will dive to sniff up the festering dust, mining for a few stray specks of obsession. If someone sneezes at the wrong time they can be beaten senseless for it.
 
For these addicts the drug offers nothing, no high, only compulsion, only brief respite from terror.
 
 
There are graveyards and necropolises where, if literally a single drop of blood, a single dollar more can be wrung from a stone, the orcs which have power are driven to do it. This dollar is worthless to them, they have infinitely more dollars than they ever could spend. What they do spend brings them no satisfaction, no contentment, no happiness, only ever greater compulsion and derangement. For the orcs the money and power offer nothing, no pleasure, no sense of strength and health. It brings only the opposite, grim compulsion and brief respite from terror they inflict first upon themselves, then upon everyone else. This is true of them as individuals, this is true of them as a group, as a city, as a civilization.
 
This is true of the elites, and it’s true of the atoms which worship these elites. The atoms which bow down and chant all day and night at the gravestone of humanity and the Earth, the atoms which worship death. They have no life, no feeling, nothing but compulsion and terror. Only such a force can drive such an extreme death-wishing addiction as we see every day, everywhere we look, in every person-to-person and person-to-Earth relationship. This is the essence of Mammon, a psychopathic derangement, the core religion of modern civilization which encompasses all modern sub-religions – neo-Christianity (science and technocracy), “progress”, liberalism, individualism, productionism, cancer (“growth”).
 
This one collective rabid dog, nothing more or less. The Earth shall put it down, put it out of its misery, above all put it out of our misery: Whatever few humans are left of us amid the burning cities of the blasted plain, we few who are ready to return home; and the greater community who have never embraced Sodom and Gomorrah, who have only been its prey but who maintain their lives amid the Earth.
 
 
 
 
 

March 8, 2019

For the Civilized War is A Domestic Ritual

>

Where the first civilization eradicated the first forests, generating the first man-made desert, war still rages to this day.

 
 
Civilized people love war. They cherish war since they know deep down their civilization depends completely upon predatory war: War on traditional peoples, war on weaker civilized societies, incessant economic civil war within each society, most of all war on the Earth itself. Modern global-Western civilization was born in war, built through war, is sustained to this day through war, and must commit suicide through war. This sums up the only meat of the religion of all civilized hominids.
 
Take for example one of their most cherished rituals, elections. Elections have no objective reality to them: There’s never a real choice, nor do the elected personnel feel any responsibility to give the voters what the voters claim to want. On the contrary, they deny in principle that they have any responsibility to the people at all. They openly proclaim that their only responsibility is to the binge and destruction imperatives of the economic civilization, and that any national election is nothing but a ritual where one votes Yes to the extreme-energy binge and the destruction. That’s all democracy has turned out to be, all it ever was. This is historical fact. And in truth this is what the voters really want, nothing more or less.
 
An election is nothing but a religious ritual. One can vote Yes, vote one’s yes-confidence in the priesthood and in the church of the extreme-energy ecocidal civilization. All else is the meaningless fake politics of a population which is nothing but squatters and vandals infesting the surface of the Earth, which give the Earth nothing in return for all they take, which wantonly despoil far more than they actually take, which are no part of the Earth at all.
 
Therefore the voters always vote unanimously for permanent war. They’ve long voted unanimously for permanent imperial war in the Mideast, for the Zionist genocidal war, for permanent war in Afghanistan, in Iraq. They all voted for the military destruction of Libya and have wanted the same for Syria. They’ve voted unanimously for twenty years of economic war on Venezuela, and next chance they get they’ll vote for military invasion, as in the past they voted for every kind of assault on every part of Latin America. They all want nuclear war with North Korea. They all want World War III with Russia and China. They all want permanent war unto total ecocide, total genocide, total suicide. All this is proven by their political actions and their day-to-day actions.
 
War always is mass murder, and war always is ecocide: The direct destruction of the explosives and poisons and vehicles and carbon emissions; the residual poisons left behind, from Agent Orange residue to every kind of chemical waste to radioactive ammunition waste; most destructive of all is war’s pretext for accelerated technological deployment and escalated over-production, again synonymous with ecocide. This is the most profound aspect of how the economic civilization loves war for the sake of profitable destruction, loves war for the sake of ratcheting up the production/consumption binge, loves war because it destroys in order to free up space to ratchet up production again. That’s a big part of why civilized people in general love permanent war: In tandem with commodity production the permanent global imperial war is a permanent world destruction machine, a permanent exercise in Dominion which is the core theology shared by monotheism and modern scientism-technocracy. The civilized voters vote for nothing but murder and suicide, with nameless decadence and misery throughout the way.
 
Thus all political Americans lust for war. That’s proven by the fact that they vote for it every time. Every election is a Yes or No plebiscite on permanent war, and the only way to vote No is to boycott the fake election completely.
 
Are there anti-war Americans? Yes, but we’re among those who gave up on fake voting. Part of reason I’ve never voted is that I truly am anti-war and therefore cannot participate in an election which is nothing but a Yes vote for war.
 
(But don’t mistake me, thinking I yearn for “better elections”. No, these are what modern elections are, what they’ve always been, just as these are what voters are, what they’ve always been.)
 
The same goes for Yes-voting for the binge economy, for ecocide, for technocracy, for the police state and prison complex, for the cultural and economic genocide of indigenous/traditional peoples and community farmers, their physical destruction soon to follow. These are the only true matters left, the only things that matter. The rest is mere squatter politics, trivia curated by the media. And even there there’s only one party to vote for and the vote always is unanimous: Yes to the same economic tyranny which drives all the real elements of the gathering apocalypse.
 
For the civilized, war is a domestic ritual, just as elections and voting are a ritual. And in fact they’re the same ritual, inextricable. The only vote being offered is Yes to war. Yes to total war unto the end.
 
I’ve never been able to think in any terms of the intrinsically murderous politics of the intrinsically murderous system. I’ve only ever been able to think in terms of building a movement completely outside the system, completely without any of the system’s personnel, completely against the system. And since it’s clear that no such movement is going to exist, today I think only in terms of spiritual kernels and arks to endure the gathering Kinesis and tribulation, to bring through the flames whatever is worth salvaging for a post-civilized, Gaian humanity. Gaia knows there’s little enough of that.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

February 9, 2019

The Purpose of Paris

>

This one’s for the trees

 
 
“In more ingenuous times, when the tyrant razed cities for his own greater glory, when the slave chained to the conqueror’s chariot was dragged through the rejoicing streets, when enemies were thrown to the wild beasts in front of the assembled people, the mind did not reel before such unabashed crimes, and judgment remained unclouded. But slave camps under the flag of freedom, massacres justified by philanthropy or by a taste for the superhuman, in one sense cripple judgment. On the day when crime dons the apparel of innocence — through a curious transposition peculiar to our times — it is innocence that is called upon to justify itself.”
 
– Albert Camus, The Rebel
 
Some call it a loophole. If so it’s a loophole wide enough to push a dead planet through. But it’s really no accident.
 
There’s a clear and simple fact. Real conservation, especially in the face of the climate crisis, means ceasing from destroying natural forests, leaving them alone, and letting them resume their ranges. Anything other than this is a fraud, and especially a climate fraud. The “biomass” industry is an atrocity. The civilization destroys forests in order to burn wood pellets for industrial electricity and heat. This is enshrined within all existing international climate agreements. The climate industry accelerates deforestation and greenhouse emissions under the rubric of “the climate”. The flag of the Earth flies from the tree-burning factory. Arbeit Macht Frei.
 
 
The climate-industrial movement, including most of its critics, has exalted the 2015 Paris agreement as the movement’s climax achievement to date, its gold-mined standard for enlightened climate policy and especially for right belief.
 
Eco-hypocrisy and eco-treason is the worst kind, and the Paris crime reaches the worst extreme yet. All mainstream climate concern focuses not on saving the Earth but on finding a way to drag out the death march of production and feeding the consumption maw. The climate movement wants to drag out the consumer economy as long as possible and has no other goal. Paris is the epitome.
 
Natural forests are the primary carbon sinks. The primary goal of the Paris scam is to complete the destruction of all the world’s natural forests and replace them with ecologically dead tree plantations as part of an ongoing logging and coal-burning industry which will continue to be a massive emitter of carbon dioxide. Of course every acre of natural forest destroyed toward this goal releases all its stored carbon in a massive surge. Contrary to the Paris lies, this carbon surge will never be “recaptured”, and it’s not meant to be.
 
Thus Paris directly contradicts the climate movement’s own IPCC which in its most recent report stressed the critical need to preserve and restore natural forests to serve as permanent sinks.
 
The Environmental Paper Network recently released a report on the escalating subsidy-driven commodity wood pellet industry. Are Forests the New Coal? lays out a “global threat map” of the toxic politics of this meld of the logging industry, the coal industry, and the climate-industrial movement.
 
Here are the report’s “Key Findings”: 1. The production and burning of wood pellets has doubled over the last ten years to 14 million metric tons in 2017. The report cites industry projections which have the destruction increasing 250% to 36 million tonnes by 2027.
 
2. In climate-industrial propaganda usage, “renewable energy” and “carbon neutral” are fake terms. Most wood pellets are processed from whole trees and the complete destruction of natural forest sinks and biodiversity. The biomass industry drives climate change and mass extinction. It’s as non-renewable and anti-ecological as it gets.
 
3. Encouraged by the Western propaganda and practice as enshrined by Paris and other climate accords, such Asian countries as Japan and South Korea are planning a massive expansion of pellet imports and burning for industry electricity and heat.
 
4. The great bulk of industrial “biomass” comes from forests. It comes from the clear-cutting of natural forests and the farming of tree plantations which are cultivated on the ground where those massacres took place. This is a direct contradiction of the movement’s own IPCC, which stresses the critical importance of natural forests as carbon sinks.
 
5. The projected surge of wood pellet consumption will escalate the destruction of all remaining natural tropical, temperate, and boreal forests. Paris and the movement envision a world where ALL natural forest will be eradicated and where all logging will be done on industrialized tree plantations. This will be a world of radically higher atmospheric CO2 concentration, higher temperatures, greater climate chaos, and greatly escalated mass extinctions of every kind of plant and animal species.
 
 
Prior to the great escalation over the last ten years, and especially prior to the subsidy regime which Paris has escalated, pellet burning was less prominent and for the most part regionally based. But in ten years the international commodity stream has surged, with an increasing number of giant tree-burning factories. This expansion, this “growth”, this cancer is the real purpose of Paris.
 
For confirmation of intent, one need only look to the system of fraudulent accounting this and other agreements set up.
 
 
The EU and the various international climate mechanisms always have used false accounting to label things “carbon neutral”, and the climate movement then launders this fraud as “renewable”, “green”. The Paris scam is the culmination to date of this atrocious political process.
 
Before getting to the Paris crimes, let’s start with the fact that the proclaimed Paris goals are absurd. Paris enshrines 2 degrees Celsius as its temporary red line, though as heating increases the goalpost will move with it. Meanwhile the last time the atmospheric carbon concentration was above 400PPM, as it has been for several years now, the global temperature was 5-10 degrees higher than now. That much heating already is locked in, although temperatures will take some time to catch up to millions of years worth of carbon increase compressed into a hundred year deluge. And throughout the thirty years of the UN-enshrined climate movement emissions have continued to increase and have been increasing at an escalating rate. Emissions will continue to rise for as long as the industrial civilization exists. So the ultimate global heating will be higher than 5-10 degrees Celsius. How much higher depends solely on how long industrial emissions and destruction of sinks continue.
 
As if these goals aren’t pathetic enough in principle, they’re also purely voluntary. The Paris goals are a pure sham in every way.
 
In fact the only part of Paris which is not voluntary are the subsidies for logging and coal. And of course the dying – by trees, by native plants and animals, and if the architects have their way, by Gaia herself.
 
So in principle all Paris has are fake goals along with the fake premise of “green capitalism”, “green growth” aka cancer, and that there’s still a “carbon budget” left to spend. This “spending”, as they abstractly call it in their technocratic way, is direct ecological destruction in the real world, the deliberate extermination of hundreds of species per day.
 
The destruction wrought by wood pelleting is clear. It eradicates old-growth forests from northern Canada to the Amazon, Latvia to Borneo, and triggers a massive emission surge. There’s the initial hemorrhage from the destruction of forest sinks (and the lost uptake those forests would have performed in the future). Logging itself and the transportation of dead trees and processing them into pellets are carbon intensive industrial actions. On “managed” forests and tree plantations we can add the fossil fuels embedded in the massive volume of insecticides and herbicides sprayed, and the fuel for the aerial spraying. The tree-burning factories spew huge amounts of CO2. Burning wood for electricity emits 50% more CO2 per megawatt hour of electricity than coal. The factories also are major emitters of particulate pollution.
 
The double high-carbon impact of destroying natural sinks and the tree-burning process makes the Paris claim that the biomass industry is carbon neutral “doubly false” in the words of the EPN report.
 
Paris bases its “carbon neutral” claim on systematic accounting fraud. They start by simply refusing to count any emissions by the energy sector. These emissions are massive, far worse than burning coal, but Paris brazenly declares them to be zero. They claim to justify this by counting all the emissions of the entire process at the logging end. This is just a trick in order to claim they’ve attained carbon neutral electrical generation.* Meanwhile they grossly under-count the emissions at the logging end and then lie about “recycling” this carbon through industrial plantation trees. There are many lies in play here.
 
1. Destroying a natural forest (the most capacious mid-range ecological sink) causes a massive release of carbon. In principle a sanitized monoculture plantation could never assimilate more than a fraction of the carbon of an old-growth forest. The ecological basis for maximum tree growth and soil building doesn’t exist.
 
2. Plantation trees never come near reaching even this diminished potential since they’re harvested much younger than this. Natural forests are renewable in themselves if left alone. If they’re destroyed and prevented from regrowing, including replacement by factory-farmed tree plantations, they never renew themselves nor is their carbon ever stored. Monoculture industrial plantations are so unproductive and counter-productive as sinks as not to count. The entire process of destroying a forest and replacing it with a plantation adds up to a non-renewable and therefore unsustainable state. So the “carbon neutral” claim is a lie both in principle and in practice.
 
3. In a natural cycle some of the carbon taken down from the air is stored in the soil, and some flows in solution to the ocean and ends up as sedimentary limestone deposits. When civilization burns the trees and destroys the soil, 100% is emitted.
 
4. Then there’s the time frame which the Paris accounting pretends doesn’t exist. The process burns all the wood and releases all the CO2 today, and in return the Earth receives the Paris IOU promising to re-sequester all this carbon twenty years from now, thirty years, a hundred…As Derrick Jensen put it, “This is accounting fraudulent enough to make Enron jealous.”
 
These future carbon-sinking forests which exist only on the Paris books and will never exist except in their propaganda are a lot like Hitler’s ghost divisions which existed nowhere but on a map. By now the Earth-destroyer civilization is becoming more and more like Hitler in the bunker. One measure of this is its felt need for such massive lie campaigns.
 
So according to their own premise, the industrial biomass carbon cycle will take a long time. But their own propaganda also says there is no time, that societies need to act now. So there’s this direct self-contradiction within the climate-industrial propaganda.
 
In reality there’s no way such a program could ever do anything but escalate and accelerate the destruction of natural forests. Productionism, the framework which Paris and the movement seek to sustain, inherently always works toward oversupply and expansion. Therefore by design and inertia it always works to generate more demand for its supply. No one who knows anything about the production economy would be surprised by the projection of 250% expansion of tree destruction and pellet burning over the next ten years. Given any fuel, as Paris fuels this industry with subsidies and propaganda support, any industry will expand as far and destructively as is physically possible.
 
The fact is, anyone who really wanted the necessary immediate action would start with a total end to the destruction of natural forests. The mainstream movement’s own IPCC, as a rule conservative in its projections, even says so. The biomass industry as enshrined in the Paris agreement directly contradicts the IPCC.
 
The whole Paris regime of fraud with its “Renewable Energy Directive” is typical of the long-running fraud of the technocratic mainstream movement as a whole, in the tradition of “offsets” and other scams designed to mask escalated emissions and wholesale ecological destruction under the “climate” rubric.
 
Massacres justified by philanthropy, and indeed a taste for the superhuman.
 
The specific biomass accounting fraud and the propaganda of calling this non-renewable extraction industry “renewable” goes back to Kyoto in 1997.
 
 
The propaganda says the biomass material is supposed to come from “residues”. This is intended to put the public in mind of leftover shavings in timber plants and dead twigs and such. In reality it means any whole trees which are killed for pellet and biofuel processing rather than for lumber are classified as “residue”. It means that most pellet production comes from whole trees killed for this purpose, most of these coming from destroyed natural forests, while those from tree plantations come from ground where the natural forest or wetland was destroyed, releasing all its carbon along with the eradication of all its biodiversity.
 
Contrary to the lies, “sawmill residue” could never accommodate the surging subsidized production and artificially generated demand, only whole trees can. Therefore Paris enshrines this fraudulent accounting of whole trees as residues. This incentive for logging trees not suitable for timber is a great driver of quantity-based deforestation. As the EPN report says, “The income generated by high-intensity harvests based on quantity criteria may make more logging operations financially viable, as compared to those operations constrained to take high quality wood alone. In places where the community is struggling to retain natural forests the advent of such a lucrative, incentives-based ‘residue’ trade can drive further logging incursions and promote clear-cutting as a logging method.”
 
This escalation of logging and in particular clear-cutting natural forests is the intended purpose of Paris. Otherwise the accord wouldn’t have gone so far out of its way to legalize this fraudulent accounting.
 
 
Since this destruction of natural forests and use of plantation trees competes with use for lumber, pulp, and other industries, it drives further logging and deforestation. If one acre of forest was slated to be clear-cut for lumber (or one acre of a plantation on a formerly forested site), and now you add an acre for wood pellets for industrial electricity, that obviously requires doubling the deforesting.
 
In the same way, they tout how some biomass comes from agricultural leftovers like straw and stover. But this means stripping agricultural land of the residues needed to maintain the soil, thus hastening its own process of destroying the soil and having to move on to further deforestation and wetland destruction.
 
This depletion of agricultural soil also drives the escalated use of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides (the lower quality the soil, the more you need). The vicious circle is total.
 
Finally, the Paris drive to maximize the replacement of forests with tree plantations for maximum biomass and biofuel production is a great spur to the campaign to deploy GM trees, especially fire-prone and destructively invasive eucalyptus, which grow faster and/or are better composed for processing into biofuels. In turn, the alleged “need” for this technology is in order to feed the Paris maw. They mass murder trees to run their pleasure cars.
 
All this is environmentalism, according to our “climate movement”.
 
 
The privileged method of burning trees includes “co-firing”. This means wood pellets are mixed with coal before burning. It’s cheaper for coal-burning factories to retool for combined wood-coal burning than to switch completely from coal to wood. This reinforces the Paris goal of artificially propping up both the logging and coal industries at the expense of the climate, Earth, and public. The policy is designed to extend the life of coal-fired power factories. France in particular has been explicit that one of its primary goals was to economically prop up coal-mining. No wonder the recent COP24 in Poland, where one of the purposes was to further hammer out procedural details for carrying out the Paris guidelines, was openly sponsored by Big Coal. All this under the flag of “the climate”. (I first typed “Big Caol”, as if really for Big Gaol. Not really a slip, but expresses reality.)
 
This is the culmination so far of Big Green’s Judenrate ideology based on collaborating with the mass murderers in order to “have a place at the table” to “manage” the ecocide-genocide. This mindset and practice goes back to the 1970s, with the mainstream corporate-dominion-environmental groups espousing an ideology which can be summed up as: Industry is good, industry is natural, industry is ecological, ecocide is ecological, destruction is conservation. As then-president of the National Wildlife Federation Jay Hair put it while denouncing the attempts of EarthFirst! and others to actually defend the Earth, “there’s no fundamental difference between destroying a river and destroying a bulldozer” (cf. Green Rage by Christopher Manes, p. 17). Which of course really means the bulldozer has precedence and right to destroy the river, destroy the forest, destroy the wetland, destroy the entire Earth. The statement is incomprehensible in any other way.
 
 
The “biomass” atrocity is the most clear proof to date that it’s impossible to do anything real within the capitalist framework, and more broadly the framework of the production-consumption civilization. It proves the politics and the culture are impossible. The grossly destructive production sectors play whack-a-mole. Try to reduce the subsidy for fossil fuels and “biomass” pops up. And as we saw, the biomass scam is based on fossil fuels and specifically designed to entrench coal-burning within the “climate” framework.
 
It’s impossible to go beyond fossil fuels anyway under the framework of modern civilization, since modernity is founded on fossil fuels. The definition of “modern” is: The period of the mass extraction and burning of fossil fuels. Industrialization inherently depends on fossil fuels and all alleged alternatives actually depend on the fossil foundation.
 
The climate-industrial movement and mainstream environmentalism as a whole want to save the industrial capitalist economy, not the planet. They’re usually explicit about this, citing their desire to save “civilization”, aka the modern production-consumption civilization. Anyone who really wanted to save the planet would have very different goals, very different demands and would organize and act in a very different way.
 
Mainstream environmentalism is just like a dope fiend trying to negotiate some level of continuing drug binge which somehow wouldn’t be as addictive and destructive as what he’s doing now.
 
Every prescription, every policy of the climate-industrial movement has zero secular purpose but to Feed the Maw. Maximum production is necessary to satisfy maximum demand, and maximum demand needs to be artificially drummed up to provide a market and “use” for maximum over-supplied production. This hideous circle swirls round and round in the most all-destructive escalating feedback loop. The Paris agreement, and all the works of mainstream Big Green, are dedicated to continuing this vicious circle unto the final lethal exhaustion of Gaia and humanity.
 
In the meantime they work to misdirect action in order to waste time and good will we no longer have to waste (contrary to the lies about “carbon budgets”), and to sow cynicism among those who might truly want to fight for the Earth, to sow denial that this is possible at all. It’s a massive sheep-dogging and gate-keeping campaign. It’s a big con.
 
 
There’s one and only one way to avert the worst of the climate crisis and the ecological crisis as a whole. This way is threefold:
 
*End all industrial emissions; *Stop destroying sinks; *Rebuild sinks and let natural sinks resume their natural ranges.
 
This is the only way to avert a total Gaian phase change which almost certainly would cause the biological extinction of hominids (unless we figure out a quicker way to wipe ourselves out), the only way to arrest the ongoing mass extinction, the only way to save anything of humanity.
 
Of course this would mean the end of industrial civilization, the end of extreme energy consumption, the end of the production-consumption framework, the end of capitalism, the end of grotesque consumerism and materialism. It would also mean the regeneration of health, happiness, and freedom as the only truly human purposes.
 
Therefore this way is anathema to the modern civilization and its tendrils, including the mainstream corporate environmental tentacle.
 
Does this faction have any ecological goal at all? With its exaltation of the biomass scam and the campaign to finish modern civilization’s extermination of the forests, we have the final smoking gun, the smoking chainsaw, the smoking ashes of the burned forest. The all-consuming fire, symbolized and fetishized in the tree-burning factory, is the real goal. Thus the climate change movement wants climate change all right. Until industrialization collapses or is abolished through an act of human self-preservation, they will drive global heating, the desert, and the flames of the wildfires as far as these can be driven. Every aspect of the modern civilization is nothing but an aspect of the hatred of life and lust for death.
 
 
 
 
*This is part of the general fraudulent practice of moving things off the books of the energy (electricity) sector and/or using the term “energy” to stand only for the electrical sector. And it’s part of the overall move of depicting climate change as identical to the ecological crisis as such, with all other elements of this crisis being relegated to non-existence for official purposes. Anytime you see claims about “100% renewable energy”, if you look at the small print you’ll usually find scams like these.
 
Then we have the broader deception of the whole notion of “renewable energy”. According to 2015 OECD numbers for industrialized countries (as reproduced in the EPN report), what they dub “renewable” makes up less than 10% of their energy production. Of this 9.7%, over 53% is “Biofuels and waste”, i.e. industrial biomass.
 
But since this all is from newly destroyed natural forest or high-impact industrial farming on land where the natural sink was destroyed, to call this “renewable” is a lie. Therefore over half of what they call “renewable” is the non-renewable (within the industrial framework) destruction of sinks. The other industries called “renewable” – industrial wind, solar, hydro, etc. – also are all directly eco-destructive and depend upon a foundation of fossil fuels. None can be self-sustaining, and none is renewable in any non-Orwellian way. It’s an axiom: Nothing industrial and nothing commodified ever can be renewable.
 
 
 
 

February 7, 2019

Carbon Sinks, Reprise and Expansion

>

A true carbon sink

 
 
Here’s an extension of an earlier piece.
 
I’ve learned about sinks mostly from books, such as the USDA SARE’s book on soil building, books on trees and forests, and James Lovelock’s Gaia books. I’m not sure about a specific website, though a quick search brought up lots of what look like basic primers. One must be use care, though, since lots of sites are “mainstream” and therefore prone to be deceptive about the great capacity difference between natural sinks and industrial monoculture plantations. But it’s the same difference as with biodiversity – a natural ecology is vast in capacity and diversity, a monoculture by definition is sterile and shallow.
 
A sink is a mode of carbon storage in a non-atmospheric form. The longest term and most capacious sink is the transfer of carbon from the air (via rain) and terrestrial rock to the ocean, where algae use it to form skeletons which then settle to the ocean floor and become limestone sediment. Over geological time some of this carbon eventually is released volcanically as CO2. Over billions of years the geophysiological process has acted to reduce the atmospheric carbon content to compensate for the gradually increasing radiance of the sun, in order to maintain comfortable temperatures for life. (One can view this teleologically or as an emergent system, according to taste.) Much carbon also was sunk as dead plant material which eventually congealed as fossil fuels, which modern civilization is irrevocably committed to returning to the atmosphere by burning every last BTU worth it can, toward total destruction and self-destruction. Global heating therefore is likely to render much of the planet uninhabitable (and pretty much all of it unarable) for humans and other large mammals well before major sea-level rise and other such effects hit their stride.
 
The ocean has absorbed a great amount, though there’s evidence that it’s reaching saturation. And higher carbon concentrations are driving acidification which hinders the ability of oceanic algae, coral, and others to incorporate carbon into their exoskeletons. So one of the potential tremendous positive feedback loops is when global heating and higher CO2 concentrations cause the ocean to flip from being a sink to an emission source.
 
Vast amounts of methane are sunk in the northern permafrost and as frozen clathrates in shallow Arctic waters. As the Arctic heats up (it’s heating at a much faster rate than the global average) the permafrost’s melt rate, already rapid, will speed up, while the clathrates will begin to melt. This feedback loop brings a high likelihood of a huge non-linear methane surge at some point in the near future.
 
Then there’s shorter term ecological sinks. The everyday carbon cycle has plants extract CO2 from the air and embody it in their tissues. Most of this returns to the air as the plant dies and decomposes, but a small amount is kept in the soil as organic carbon. The longest lasting forms in the soil are humus and charcoal. The longest lasting plant tissues are the wood of living and growing old-growth trees. Natural forests incarnate the most carbon of any ecology. The older and more evolved the forest, the more carbon it incarnates and the more it will incarnate going forward. Wetlands and grasslands also are capacious sinks.
 
Contrary to the lies of governments, corporations, and fake “environmental” NGOs, monoculture tree plantations and other monocultures are very weak sinks with little capacity. To destroy a natural forest and replace it with a plantation equals a huge net emission of CO2, as well as the lost capacity of what that forest would have stored over the coming centuries.
 
A “constructed wetland” is similar. It’s an anodyne thing to put in the place of a destroyed natural wetland where it will in a very meager, inadequate way try to serve as a substitute. (This is a typical example of modern civilization’s decadence of destroying what works and is necessary and then trying to substitute something which doesn’t work.) Mostly it’s for propaganda purposes, for governments, corporations, and NGOs who collaborate in destroying the Earth. It cannot substitute for a real wetland for any of the “services” wetlands give the Earth – sinking carbon, controlling water flow, being habitat for diverse wildlife (flora and fauna).
 
Therefore there is no substitute for a complete and permanent ceasefire, a permanent end to the destruction of natural sinks, and no subsitute for letting forests, wetlands, and grasslands resume their natural ranges in their natural ways, and leaving them all alone. Anyone who claims to want to mitigate the climate crisis (and the ongoing sixth mass extinction and every other part of the general ecological crisis) but who advocates anything less than this, let alone the further destruction of natural forests, is a fraud and a liar. The mainstream climate movement not only doesn’t want to draw a line on the destruction of sinks, but its Paris scam actively wants to escalate and accelerate the destruction of ALL forests through its massive subsidies for the “biomass” scam and crime, which means killing trees to burn their wood pellets for electricity and heat, and to use them for biofuels. This is the most vile ecological crime of all. More on the Paris deforestation onslaught in an upcoming piece.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

February 5, 2019

Anthrop-obscene

>

They call this “the natural rhythm and harmony” of the forest.

 
 
(The clear-cut in that photo was approved by the Forest Stewardship Council, a mainstay of the proposition that in order to save the Earth you have to destroy it.)
 
I’ve been reading a book about trees which began very well and has rhapsodic descriptions of forest and soil ecology. But here in the second chapter I already run into an all too common piece of vicious ideology, the false notion that modern commodity production can be assimilated to “natural” rhythms and harmonies. (The author uses those words.)
 
Since it’s still early in the book I won’t name it yet, since I don’t want to sound like a panning review of what’s been mostly a very good book. Maybe this will just turn out to be a lapse. But I’m mentioning this because it goes to show how deep the rot runs even among those most seemingly conscious of the ecology, where they’ve nevertheless been corrupted by the economic civilization and feel the need to shill for it.
 
To be clear, those who claim that modern production-consumption can be ecological and evolutionary are claiming that leaping from the roof of a hundred-story skyscraper is the same thing as slowly descending a staircase. They claim that the radical acceleration and impact don’t add up to a qualitative difference, though none of them seems willing to test out their theory in practice. In reality this is such a difference as to comprise an attempt by modern civilization to leap completely out of all ecological frameworks and out of evolution itself.
 
This is the purpose of the “Anthropocene” propaganda gambit. More and more civilizationists sense the self-destructiveness of their onslaught, how this can’t be sustained for much longer, and they feel the ground shake under their feet.
 
But they’re religiously committed to all the aspects of the extreme energy civilization: Dominion theology (in its original de jure Christian form or in its secularized economic/science version), production-consumption, capitalism, scientism, “progress”, Mammon. Therefore they can’t face the truth, so they’ve cobbled together the “anthropocene” ideology which tries to normalize civilization’s anti-ecological depredations simply by plotting a new name on the geophysiological timeline to characterize the period where modern civilization has been destroying humanity and the Earth. In this way they try to convince themselves that everything happening is “natural” and therefore sustainable. Therefore their Sodom and Gomorrah saturnalia of murder and destruction can continue. As the mythologist put it, they’ll continue “free and wild and beyond good and evil, with laws and morals thrown aside and all men shouting and killing and reveling in joy. The liberated Old Ones [fossil fuels] would teach them new ways to shout and kill and revel and enjoy themselves, and all the earth will flame with a holocaust of ecstasy and freedom.”
 
The lie of the anthropocene is for those who feel qualms about this but are determined to continue regardless. The mainstream environmental movement, especially the climate-industrial movement, long has served the same purpose, to help hand-wringing crocodile-tearing good Western middle-class individualists to have their fake idea of “saving the earth” while continuing to murder it.
 
And yet the very fact of the growing popularity of this ideology (even corporations and conservatives mostly have moved on from direct climate denial to various profitable “green” scams) is a symptom of the deteriorating moral and existential confidence of the civilizationists. Those who are self-confident don’t need such ideological justifications, they just go ahead and do what they want without thinking about it. But we see how today’s status quo-mongers feel the need to reassure themselves and find retorts to the rising recognition that this civilization is destroying the Earth and that there is no way forward within this framework.
 
Of course, the anthropocene/greenscam ideology which would try to “ecologize” eco-destruction contradicts another fundamental of civilization, the Dominion theology of Man vs. Nature, Nature as an enemy to be subjugated and exploited by Man, a woman to be raped by science (h/t Francis Bacon), an automaton to be tortured (Descartes), Gaia as the realm of Satan to be Reclaimed in preparation for the Rapture/Second Coming/Singularity.
 
But as we see, the most shrill priests and devotees of the Christian-Scientism dominion theology don’t have much confidence in it. They shriek so hysterically in a vain try to prop up their own faltering faith.
 
And this inability to sustain their direct belligerence, their good conscience in their own murderousness, is what’s causing so many of them to resort to the anodyne of trying to convince themselves that their dominion isn’t really a war on nature at all, but a part of nature.
 
Gaia ain’t buying it.
 
 
 
 
 
 

February 4, 2019

Resource Curse

>

The Dominion Civilization’s vision for all Earth.

 
 
Civilized hominids curse themselves and the Earth whole with their Dominionist tenet of commodity “resources” and assembly-line practice of extracting them, systematically turning vibrance to stasis, life to death.
 
At this late existential stage of the religious-economic and ecological crisis, a sane government which really wanted the best for the people would launch a crash program to break free of fossil fuel dependency. This is especially true for oil and gas producers like Venezuela, whose dependency on oil exports guarantees they remain at best a US-colonized power, all the while requiring the physical destruction of their own land and the biological basis of their future life.
 
If a nation has committed itself to:
 
(1) A de facto colonized extraction-based economy (which also involves physically destroying your own country as profoundly as if from an external military attack);
 
(2) Which is at the mercy of a global commodity system;
 
(3) Which is controlled by vastly more powerful forces which are aggressive, militarist bullies under the best of circumstances and are irrationally hostile toward that nation in particular;
 
Then I don’t see any way to exist other than at the mercy of such hostile forces. I don’t know what possible way out Venezuela has within the framework of the globalized extreme energy civilization.
 
 
I’m not just saying this about Venezuela, although its destruction of the Orinoco rain forest which sustains all of our physical lives in order to extract heavy oil is perhaps the most extreme example on Earth of the self-destroying paradigm. The Bolivarians have continued erecting their oil sands necropolis, the rest of their cities being voluntary tributaries of it.
 
But the same is true of all colonized extraction zones and the people who inhabit them, up to and including America’s death zones of fracking, mountaintop removal coal mining, and the destruction swathes driven by pipelines.
 
Any country afflicted with the oil curse ought to treat the deposits like very hot radioactive waste and enforce at all costs a Chernobyl-type no-go zone. This also would conserve critical ecologies like the Amazon. If enough places did this simultaneously it would prevent the US from “opening them up” by force and accelerate the collapse of the empire and its globalization system. But any place which doesn’t do this automatically becomes a de facto colony and a target for US aggression intended to turn them into a de jure colony, as we see in Venezuela’s case.
 
From the evidence it seems that in the end an ideology like Bolivarianism isn’t offering any real alternative to the US paradigm. Both equally want to burn every last fossil BTU’s worth, pump every last Earth-heating CO2 molecule, hack down and burn every last acre of forest. Both are on the same mass murder-suicide ride.
 
Do the Venezulean people really want no better life than this? The American people sure seem to want the worst, for themselves and everyone else.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

February 2, 2019

Venezuela, Russia, Britain, Greece…..America

>

There is complete consensus on transforming the Amazon to this.

 
 
1. The US government openly is trying to overthrow the democratically elected government of Venezuela* for no reason other than because it’s nominally “socialist” (really a hybrid more capitalist than socialist) and simply for the sake of chaos and destruction, which are the primary values and goals of the late-stage Extreme Energy Civilization. The US government simply issued a diktat that Maduro is not the real president of Venezuela, while some geek who was never even a candidate, who has no broad political support at all, who a large proportion of Venezuelans had never heard of before, but who was brought to the US and put through one of its Chicago Boy-type stooge-training programs, is in fact the real president.
 
[*At any rate Maduro has more democratic legitimacy, in terms of the transparency of ballots and the percentage of votes received from the electorate, than US president Trump, prior US presidents Obama, Bush, Clinton and most others, UK prime minister May, French premier Macron, German premier Merkel, and most other Western executive officers. Electoralism is not a value at this site, but all these governments and political habitats starting with the US profess electoral “democracy” as the highest political value, so as always we hold them to their own standard. By the United States’ own standard, Venezuelan democracy is far more legitimate than that of the US, and Maduro is one of the most legitimate heads of state on earth.]
 
The US is heading up a coalition of anti-democracy regime changers. Like synchronized swimmers the EU and almost all Western governments issued statements recognizing Guano or whatever his name is as the legitimate president. In the US both halves of the Imperial One-Party and the entire political-cultural-academic-media class all rushed as one to condemn Venezuelan democracy and support the incipient US coup with the inevitable destruction of the country and its people guaranteed to follow. To be as symbolically explicit as possible, Trump dug up Elliot Abrams, overseer of the Nicaraguan “Contra” death squad campaign, to be architect of the terror campaign the US plans for Venezuela.
 
Although Democrats have a deranged personal hatred for Trump and oppose almost anything he does (almost all of which is substantively the same as Obama policy), including Trump’s announcement that he plans to withdraw US troops from Syria and Venezuela (I’ll believe it when they’re actually out; but in the meantime Trump gave the occasion for the liberals as a whole to demonstrate their rabid lust for maximal war), the one point of friendship where they’ll joyously join hands and sing with him is an incipient new imperial adventure, new war, new bloodbath.
 
The US already has been waging murderous war on Venezuela’s people for twenty years through economic sanctions. Democrats have all the same blood on their hands as Republicans already, but as we saw with their sanctions war on the Iraqi people which murdered over half a million children, there’s no amount of dead which can satisfy Democrat blood-lust. As one of their most respected and revered moral leaders has said of this genocide against children, “We think it was worth it.”
 
Now they want to escalate the war to total physical destruction. The Democrat Party speaks as one on this. The fake “insurgents” did their best to dodge any comment at all. Only when pressed did the likes of Bernie Sanders speak out, and when they did it was to regurgitate Trump’s lies. Only lamely at the end did some of them say “nevertheless the US shouldn’t interfere”. Of course the sanctions they’ve all supported have constituted massively interference all along. They’re the direct cause of most of Venezuela’s economic chaos and suffering. Of course, in standard disaster capitalist practice, US propaganda blames the victim for the disaster that the US itself directly caused. The entire US political class – both parties, their partisans, the entire media – mouths this lie as one.
 
The evidence record is that the US corporate state, both flavors of the Destruction One-Party, the entire US political-cultural-media class have no goal other than complete destruction in every way. I can’t think of a single way in which US policy, and the overall US culture, isn’t committed to destroying as much of humanity and the Earth as possible, for nothing but destruction for its own sake. It’s certainly not for any alleged benefits of power or wealth; it’s clear that none of these psychopaths could ever be satisfied in any way with anything less than the infinite.
 
The only thing they’re stopping short of, so far, is a nuclear first strike. But it a guarantee they’ll come to this as well if things keep going like this.
 
 
2. Part of the general situation today for globalization and empire:
 
“Of all areas of global power politics today, international finance and foreign investment have become the key flashpoint. International monetary reserves were supposed to be the most sacrosanct, and international debt enforcement closely associated.
 
Central banks have long held their gold and other monetary reserves in the United States and London. Back in 1945 this seemed reasonable, because the New York Federal Reserve Bank (in whose basement foreign central bank gold was kept) was militarily safe, and because the London Gold Pool was the vehicle by which the U.S. Treasury kept the dollar “as good as gold” at $35 an ounce. Foreign reserves over and above gold were kept in the form of U.S. Treasury securities, to be bought and sold on the New York and London foreign-exchange markets to stabilize exchange rates. Most foreign loans to governments were denominated in U.S. dollars, so Wall Street banks were normally named as paying agents.
 
That was the case with Iran under the Shah, whom the United States had installed after sponsoring the 1953 coup against Mohammed Mosaddegh when he sought to nationalize Anglo-Iranian Oil (now British Petroleum) or at least tax it. After the Shah was overthrown, the Khomeini regime asked its paying agent, the Chase Manhattan bank, to use its deposits to pay its bondholders. At the direction of the U.S. Government, Chase refused to do so. U.S. courts then declared Iran to be in default, and froze all its assets in the United States and anywhere else they could.
 
This showed that international finance was an arm of the U.S. State Department and Pentagon.”
 
 
At least as early as 1979 (when the Pentagon seized and re-sold weaponry Iran already had paid for) the world has known that the US government and international banks will engage at will in outright robbery of assets legally deposited within the US-dominated system. In spite of this knowledge Venezuela’s Bolivarian government has been unflaggingly in its desire to be part of this system and therefore has been victimized by it repeatedly. In December 2018 the Bank of England simply stole $11 billion worth of Venezuelan gold deposits. It refused to follow the Venezuelan central bank’s instructions to begin to transfer the gold and told them it would no longer respond to any communications from Venezuela. This is straight robbery, straight organized crime, straight gangsterism. But it’s neither new, nor surprising, nor unexpected. Obviously Venezuela was willing to run this risk for the privilege of participation in the global economy of total destruction.
 
As we’ve seen so many times, participation in globalization is a badly misguided commitment for any nation vulnerable to economic and physical aggression, or any nation who is merely one of the passengers along for the commodity globalization ride (often an extremely tempestuous ride) rather than one of the drivers.
 
I’ve written many times how it’s especially insane to relinquish one’s food security and self-sufficiency in food by subjecting food production to any commodity system. The national governments which have done this and all propagandists everywhere who have supported it are Nuremburg-level criminals.
 
It’s similarly insane for a nation to subject itself to colonial dependency by basing its economy on “resource extraction” (including the physical destruction of one’s own land), with these extracted materials then placed on the global commodity market. Thus a people willingly enslaves itself to the global finance system and the whims of Washington. Why not just offer to become de jure slaves on the estates of the banksters? (Libertarian ideology offers baroque justifications for voluntarily selling oneself into slavery.)
 
It would be bad enough to physically destroy your own country to extract oil for your own use. To do so in order to put the oil on the global commodity market is insanity. But then all modern governments, and all cultural-political elites among all peoples who have such elites, are insane.
 
Venezuela including its so-called “socialist” government is a willing, eager participant in the capitalist globalization system.** As are Russia and China, so often touted as alleged opponents of this system. In reality all the actions of Russia, China, Venezuela, and other officially designated “enemies” prove that these governments never wanted to challenge US-led globalization and don’t want to challenge it even now. All they want is to take what they see as their rightful place within the system and be treated accordingly. Only the flat-out totalitarian lunacy of US bullying and aggression is forcing these countries into the de facto position of challengers and therefore rivals if not enemies. In the same way that only US aggression has created Muslim terrorists, so only US aggression has created any opposition at all to US domination of the globalization system. And there’s still no systematic opposition anywhere on earth to globalization as such, other than the rising opposition and counterattack of the Earth itself.
 
Like anyone else, the people of Venezuela would be vastly better off if they had neither oil nor gold. That’s why it’s called the resource curse. Humanity as a whole would be infinitely better off if fossil fuels never had existed, and if nothing existed which could have been made to play the role gold has played.
 
People don’t eat oil or gold, they eat food, which they’re perfectly capable of growing for themselves if they choose. The problem of the Venezuelans, Greeks, and so on up to the Americans themselves, is that they want all the worthless Earth-destroying material junk instead of health, happiness, and freedom. I recall well how the people of Greece were targeted for economic destruction in order to bail out German banks, how they wailed and cried about this, how they voted to oppose the Troika’s austerity program, and yet how after all that they still opposed leaving the EU. They just couldn’t conceive of a world without merely the idea of “free trade” in allegedly-less-expensive worthless Earth-destroying junk. Never mind that they were dooming themselves to impoverishment and wouldn’t able to buy the junk anyway.
 
This is the self-enslavement of the production-consumption religious insanity which is the core psychic force driving globalization and modern civilization itself. That’s why all civilized masses (“nations”) are made up of slaves who wallow amid cancer-giving poison. That’s why the Greeks immolated themselves. That’s why the Russians still temporize. That’s why Bolivarian Venezuela practically poised itself for the war crisis it now faces. And that’s why all civilized peoples have shackled themselves to an unsustainable mode of agriculture where they are in fact eating oil, figuratively and physically (the diet is loaded with fossil-derived plastics and pesticides and other toxins) but which will soon collapse leaving them to starve in earnest. Because they chose slavery over freedom.
 
As for the American Mordor itself, the gaslight-pulsing glowing-plutonium core of the global psychosis, the American people are doing the same thing. They’re surrendering their lands as sacrifice zones to fracking and pipelines, to poison plantations and state-wide fire traps, all to produce globalized commodities usually earmarked to send to Asia or Europe. Mr. MAGA, of course, wants to destroy even more American land to send liquid natural gas to Europe at taxpayer-funded below-cost prices. Just as all US logging, mining, and fossil fuel extraction is done at a massive loss which the taxpayers make up. The voters vote for it unanimously every time. Nor does there exist any alternative within US electoralism. America has terminal cancer of the body and soul. This places the domestic political depravity I discussed above in its biological, existential context.
 
 
If you’re colonized, don’t have your own currency, and want to buy all the worthless expensive junk the colonial power is peddling, you’re going to be enslaved by debt and subject to imperial terror and aggression. The Venezuelans and Americans are colonized. The Venezuelan currency depends on its ability to sell dollar-denominated oil which is as good as having no currency. Of course the American 99% have no control over the dollar and therefore no native currency. The Greeks, Italian, Iberians, Irish, and the rest of the EU have no currency of their own. (Except Germany itself, which has transformed the euro into a de facto German-controlled currency. Thus by a longer and more convoluted route the German elites have attained the economic goals of WWII.) The one and only way for a people to free itself is to end their self-enslavement, end all their dependencies and addictions, and renounce the lust for junk, including the self-jubilation of all debts.
 
Self-enslavement scales well, from individual to the people of a country to the “New World Order” of corporate globalization fantasy: One can wish to live like a human being, which makes it possible to live within one’s means while enjoying health, happiness, freedom, and peace; or one can surrender to the productionist/consumerist derangement, renounce all human measure and hopes, set one’s desires at infinity and set out on the death march of rat-racing and debt, never attaining anything but increasing clutter, waste dumps, dependency, insecurity, ill-health, unhappiness, and fear.
 
All the peoples of all colonized lands, including the peoples of America and the West itself, will have to make the choice truly to free themselves if freedom and security is truly what they wish. All versions of the “we can have it all” fraud comprise the same lie, a symptom of the general pathology of Babylon. On the contrary, those who try to have it all, gamble for the infinite, guarantee themselves one terminal end. The global productionist system has one fated end for everyone on Earth from the colonized South to the gradually fading Western middle class: Debt slavery and the total destruction of food security, amid total ecological devastation.
 
We’re undergoing the great spiritual, economic, ecological, existential crisis of the terminal Oil Age. We cannot solve the crisis of mortality by suicide or murder. We can solve it only by changing our lives, choosing what lets us live, renouncing what is killing us.
 
 
 
**The fact that it’s still possible to use the term “socialist” for ecologically destructive, oil-extraction-dependent (therefore by definition colonial) systems is a perfect example of why I renounced “the left”. Just as it’s a fact that anything truly feminist, anti-racist, anti-imperialist has to be socialist, so it’s also true that ecological socialism is a redundant term. It’s not possible to separate ecological domination from social domination. The two invariably go hand in hand. Of course a capitalist hybrid system like that of Venezuela, or like what the Bernbots claim to want in the US, isn’t socialist even from a purely human-centric point of view. Meanwhile “the left” as a whole has renounced even anti-globalism, as we’ve seen with its complete dereliction on Brexit. Here was an opportunity to seize the controversy, to place the referendum in the context of anti-globalization and democracy vs. the technocracy represented by the European Commission, to put a socialist Brexit on the agenda, and the leftists all ran home to globalist mama. They did it for the same reason as the gilded youth of London, the same reason as always: In their indelible corruption they feared their worthless “stuff” might cost a bit more, or their swank weekends in Spain wouldn’t go as seamlessly, or that it wouldn’t be as easy to go job-hunting around the continent for parasitic global-corporate-system jobs. (Needless to say no real kind of human work, work which by its nature is bound up with a geographical region, was enhanced by EU-style globalization, quite the contrary.) In addition to allegedly opposing globalism and corporate rule, I also thought leftism was supposed to oppose the employer-“job” model as such.
 
No, the left offers no alternative, and no way out of the all-encompassing existential crisis of humanity and Earth.
 
 
 
 
 
Older Posts »