Anarchist Climate Science 3 w/ two videos.

One problem with science for Anarchists is the view that science is a "specialist discourse" for the educated,
middle-class and elite. Given the current educational system in the US, it is difficult to see how it would be otherwise: the school system which generates the class system in the political economy will also do so for science as well as philosophy and the arts. As public education becomes increasingly underfunded and simply a mandatory holding tank for those who don't come from wealth, opportunities to reference the history and practice of contemporary science disappear.

The 1980's and the development of computer/cyberspace held out the possibility that with access to the internet, the non-specialist public would be able to acquire scientific skills in their own time and space: initially, peer-reviewed scientific studies were made available to those with internet at no extra cost, on university, journal and scientific websites. Increasingly, science studies have become membership - only, but many non-pay sites have proliferated. A good bit of background work is required to find out how the site is funded and by whom, and the scientific credibility of its authors.

With climate science, the authors seem to fall into two categories: a majority of understandably alarmist scientists from the university system and a minority of 'climate-deniers' affiliated in one way or another with the fossil-fuel industry. As many science programs in universities are funded by grants related to the fossil-fuel industry, many scientists have refused to speak openly about climate change for fear of losing their jobs. Hence, one gets sites with very advanced raw data and imaging and anonymous (or nearly so) authorship :

Increasingly, what counts for news and information in the US is a wide-open debate: "What is trust-worthy information?" At every step it is important to know who is producing and funding the info; what does the info actually say if we do analysis on its message and then what do we personally think about/feel about & take from or make of that info? In this way, we might be able to generate an Anarchist Science of science, that is, a methodical study of contemporary science, instead of simply retweeting mainstream stories as on sites like reddit and raddle.

Still, it was reported on a CBS affiliate that climate scientists are predicting the Philadelphia International Airport will be under water with a 4-degree Fahrenheit rise in temperature, with the present being + 1.75F. ... At issue, is the possible disappearance of Arctic sea ice either this summer or the next depending on several factors, as outlined in two videos by Paul Beckwith, a climate scientist at the University of Ottawa:


One result of a review of climate change data is an increased sense of urgency in notions of policy and indeed, regime change: the present power structure has suppressed the information which was required to avoid our present (sic) calamity. In 2006, Mike Davis wrote "Planet of Slums" in which he showed that the World Bank, The IMF, The UN and all of the major powers have had this climate data since before the year 2000. That's more than eighteen years of suppression, which to one, seems psycho-pathological and fascist, if we use Deleuze and Guattari's notion that fascism is at base, suicidal. So this is food for thought and discussion, and I for one would like to see the Anarchist Climate discourse improved at A-News.

Stupid last paragraph... Totsally ignores that the IMF and CFR already had a preset carbon tax policy as far back as year 2000, so no they didn't wanted to silence the issue. As a matter of fact they pushed their view of climate change -then called "global warming"- in order to justify a level of global management to be accepted and instill a system of submission from regional authorities and NGOs. Therre are people who've been beliving in a synarchy as the answer to the world's problems, and thought that the UN is not enough. This is the movement behind the TPP and formerly NAFTA. The only way where this is fascistic, beyond trying to modify the behavior of the little people so that we get a " greener" totalitarian regime, lies in their fusion of State and corporate power.

Then you bring in Deleuze/Guattari to tell us that fascism is suicidal. Two complete esoteric clowns whith nearly-zero experience of fascism, or combatting it. Gtfo, srsly. Fascists are only "suicidal" in the way that they are careless and senseless about their politics. But their demise might come after 5 years like 500 years of rule. Depending on how their power is opposed or not. Being led by blind faith isn't exactly suicidal, just dumb.

The only one who was suicidal here is Deleuze. And that's a fact not a statement.

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Enter the code without spaces.