You may, or your instance may not be federated with them. You can browse it anonymously or make an account that is federated with them if you want to see it.
My instance doesn’t block it, but I blocked it with the recent feature added in 0.19.3 or 4, give or take. I think I got tired of seeing the angry people.
Eh, solarpunk itself is an aesthetic, not an ideology. As such, like cottagecore and other aesthetics without ideological backing, there does exist a subset of ecofascists and ecofascist adjacent ideologies.
disagreed! there is an aesthetic but there is also separately an ideology, and ecofascism is certainly not welcome on (e.g.) slrpnk.net. solarpunk as an ideological movement is essentially climate-focused indigenous futurism with an anarcho-socialist bend
solarpunk as an ideological movement is essentially climate-focused indigenous futurism with an anarcho-socialist bend
That’s not a coherent ideology, that’s an aesthetic pulled from a ghibli-inspired milk commercial, which again reveals how an aesthetic can get taken advantage of by right-wing interests if there is no strong ideological framework.
There’s no call to action, no theory to set to praxis. There is a goal, but no method to get there. Like all such movements, its doomed to fail the way the Owenites did.
I love environmentalism and solar energy, veganism and self-sustainability. However, solarpunk as an encompassing “movement” is not the path there, as it’s an aesthetic.
Idk why you think it has to have theory or praxis to be a movement. It does have a manifesto but I kinda doubt you care about that. There’s enough people that are interested in the topics that solarpunk encompasses to give it legitimacy.
Tbh your position is kinda disenfranchising to people that got into gardening, anti consumption, diy, gurilla grafting or any other facet of solarpunk because of it being under the umbrella.
Idk why you think it has to have theory or praxis to be a movement. It does have a manifesto but I kinda doubt you care about that. There’s enough people that are interested in the topics that solarpunk encompasses to give it legitimacy.
I was interested, actually. I read through it, a lot of things people say they stand for and against, and what types of art styles they like and envision, but no actual theory or praxis behind it.
I already stated why it needs a strong ideological backbone to avoid being taken advantage of by ecofascists, but I’ll restate it: bad actors can and will use the aesthetic to push alternative messaging, just like what already happened to cottagecore.
Tbh your position is kinda disenfranchising to people that got into gardening, anti consumption, diy, gurilla grafting or any other facet of solarpunk because of it being under the umbrella.
Those are certainly good things, I never stated that Solarpunk is only “bad,” in fact I think many good things have come from it. However, to paint it as a place of “happy communists” when there have been ecofascists using it to push their messaging, is a bit off, hence why I pointed it out and explained my issues with it overall.
Solarpunk isn’t an ideology though, it’s an aesthetic that can be molded depending on the views of those using it. I never said good people can’t use solarpunk to push a good message, I said there’s nothing stopping people from using Solarpunk to spread a bad message.
that’s the conversation we’re having, isn’t it? i’d say solarpunk as an ideology predates solarpunk the aesthetic. che guevara shirts are sold in stores, after all.
I’d like to see fewer angry communists. Regular communists don’t bother me, but don’t be so aggressive about it.
Where are you finding non-angry Communists, except in Communist spaces where we don’t have to argue with liberals all the time?
Not on Lemmy, hence it’s what I’d like to change.
Hexbear.net is generally pretty happy until a liberal walks in.
I think I have that instance blocked.
You may, or your instance may not be federated with them. You can browse it anonymously or make an account that is federated with them if you want to see it.
My instance doesn’t block it, but I blocked it with the recent feature added in 0.19.3 or 4, give or take. I think I got tired of seeing the angry people.
They usually aren’t angry, in my experience.
happier communists? do you mean slrpnk.net?
Eh, solarpunk itself is an aesthetic, not an ideology. As such, like cottagecore and other aesthetics without ideological backing, there does exist a subset of ecofascists and ecofascist adjacent ideologies.
Hexbear.net fits “happy communists” better.
disagreed! there is an aesthetic but there is also separately an ideology, and ecofascism is certainly not welcome on (e.g.) slrpnk.net. solarpunk as an ideological movement is essentially climate-focused indigenous futurism with an anarcho-socialist bend
That’s not a coherent ideology, that’s an aesthetic pulled from a ghibli-inspired milk commercial, which again reveals how an aesthetic can get taken advantage of by right-wing interests if there is no strong ideological framework.
There’s no call to action, no theory to set to praxis. There is a goal, but no method to get there. Like all such movements, its doomed to fail the way the Owenites did.
I love environmentalism and solar energy, veganism and self-sustainability. However, solarpunk as an encompassing “movement” is not the path there, as it’s an aesthetic.
This is written like someone that hasn’t kept up with solarpunk since that commercial came out.
What theory and praxis has come out since then?
Idk why you think it has to have theory or praxis to be a movement. It does have a manifesto but I kinda doubt you care about that. There’s enough people that are interested in the topics that solarpunk encompasses to give it legitimacy.
Tbh your position is kinda disenfranchising to people that got into gardening, anti consumption, diy, gurilla grafting or any other facet of solarpunk because of it being under the umbrella.
I was interested, actually. I read through it, a lot of things people say they stand for and against, and what types of art styles they like and envision, but no actual theory or praxis behind it.
I already stated why it needs a strong ideological backbone to avoid being taken advantage of by ecofascists, but I’ll restate it: bad actors can and will use the aesthetic to push alternative messaging, just like what already happened to cottagecore.
Those are certainly good things, I never stated that Solarpunk is only “bad,” in fact I think many good things have come from it. However, to paint it as a place of “happy communists” when there have been ecofascists using it to push their messaging, is a bit off, hence why I pointed it out and explained my issues with it overall.
If it doesn’t have ideas and it isn’t testing those ideas through social practice it isn’t a movement?
you’re welcome to check out solarpunk thought leaders like andrewism! though i have to admit i doubt anything anywhere will ever meet your standards
Solarpunk isn’t an ideology though, it’s an aesthetic that can be molded depending on the views of those using it. I never said good people can’t use solarpunk to push a good message, I said there’s nothing stopping people from using Solarpunk to spread a bad message.
that’s the conversation we’re having, isn’t it? i’d say solarpunk as an ideology predates solarpunk the aesthetic. che guevara shirts are sold in stores, after all.