Ruppert: Collapse

[Lyev]

I think much of what he says is valid, as regards energy, peak oil, food etc., but he also mentions that socialism, communism, (and capitalism I should mention) are all "dead words", which I thought was strange since he mentioned two things that seemed vaguely Marxist or leftist. Firstly, in the documentary-film he explained the financial crisis by way of "derivatives" (IIRC) and explained that there are things with concrete value, but then the global economy (or maybe just the US) in late 2008 had something like $70 trillion of "derivation" floating around in it (what Marxists would call "fictitious capital"). Crises occur when there's not enough concrete value back in the real economy to back this up; hence the endeavour of the bailouts and whatnot. Also, he mentions various times that the only solution to the collapse of society etc. is for people to come together as communities, and produce their daily lives locally, which sounds vaguely primitivist now I look back on it actually. Anyway, I think he's a fairly interesting chap, and it was a very interesting documentary. Has anyone seen it, or have any thoughts on it, or any criticism etc. of Michael Ruppert and theories about "collapse" or his musings on peak oil and such?

[Os Cangaceiros]

As I remember it, he doesn't seem to put a lot of faith in human ingenuity/creativity. Which is definitely a considerable force.

[Salyut]

http://peakoildebunked.blogspot.com/2009/09/423-mike-ruppert-prophet.html

http://peakoildebunked.blogspot.com/2005/09/115-mike-ruppert-peak-oil-stooge.html

I think this is a pretty good evaluation of his credibility.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

I think much of what he says is valid, as regards energy, peak oil, food etc., but he also mentions that socialism, communism, (and capitalism I should mention) are all "dead words", which I thought was strange since he mentioned two things that seemed vaguely Marxist or leftist. Firstly, in the documentary-film he explained the financial crisis by way of "derivatives" (IIRC) and explained that there are things with concrete value, but then the global economy (or maybe just the US) in late 2008 had something like $70 trillion of "derivation" floating around in it (what Marxists would call "fictitious capital"). Crises occur when there's not enough concrete value back in the real economy to back this up; hence the endeavour of the bailouts and whatnot.

It's easy to observe that most capital flow is based on a fiction - what is important is the conclusion made from that. Marx's conclusion was workers' self-emancipation. Ruppert appears to avoid the issue.


Also, he mentions various times that the only solution to the collapse of society etc. is for people to come together as communities, and produce their daily lives locally, which sounds vaguely primitivist now I look back on it actually.

It's generally a good idea to try and keep our supply chains short, but I suspect with Ruppert there's something more to it than that.


Anyway, I think he's a fairly interesting chap, and it was a very interesting documentary. Has anyone seen it, or have any thoughts on it, or any criticism etc. of Michael Ruppert and theories about "collapse" or his musings on peak oil and such?

Prophecies of impending doom aren't revolutionary; they encourage passivity. Why bother doing anything worthwhile if all we have to look forward to is the Apocalypse and a new Dark Ages?

[bcbm]

Prophecies of impending doom aren't revolutionary; they encourage passivity.

there are a great deal of historical events that show quite the opposite- the desire for the apocalypse can be harnessed and used as fuel for revolutionary aspirations.

"There is a secret meaning to the apocalypse. It is not the end of time, but the end of this particular time. Not the end of the world, but the end of this particular world."

i'm personally all for a communistic millenarian revival.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

there are a great deal of historical events that show quite the opposite- the desire for the apocalypse can be harnessed and used as fuel for revolutionary aspirations.

Can you name one that didn't end badly?


"There is a secret meaning to the apocalypse. It is not the end of time, but the end of this particular time. Not the end of the world, but the end of this particular world."

i'm personally all for a communistic millenarian revival.

I like to think we can achieve a classless society without resorting to superstitious or quasi-religious mindsets.

[bcbm]

Can you name one that didn't end badly?

um, basically nothing on "our side" has ended well. that doesn't negate the feeling that lead to those historical ruptures.


I like to think we can achieve a classless society without resorting to superstitious or quasi-religious mindsets.

i don't see what superstition or "quasi-religion" have to do with anything? we're living on the brink of a very real global catastrophe and i don't think channeling the apocalyptic feelings this brings into a desire for a total break with the present is necessarily bad.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

um, basically nothing on "our side" has ended well. that doesn't negate the feeling that lead to those historical ruptures.

I think it can be more usefully channeled.


i don't see what superstition or "quasi-religion" have to do with anything? we're living on the brink of a very real global catastrophe and i don't think channeling the apocalyptic feelings this brings into a desire for a total break with the present is necessarily bad.

Is this what happens, though? Do feelings of the end being nigh easily translate into social action? I'm skeptical, to say the least.

[bcbm]

I think it can be more usefully channeled.

what could historical millenarian proto-communist social ruptures been more usefully channeled towards?


Is this what happens, though? Do feelings of the end being nigh easily translate into social action? I'm skeptical, to say the least.
there are a great deal of historical events that show . . . the desire for the apocalypse can be harnessed and used as fuel for revolutionary aspirations.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

what could historical millenarian proto-communist social ruptures been more usefully channeled towards?

You said you were "all for a communistic millenarian revival", yet you acknowledge that sort of thing ended badly?

I must be missing something here. I thought the point of learning history was not to repeat it?

[bcbm]

You said you were "all for a communistic millenarian revival", yet you acknowledge that sort of thing ended badly?

I must be missing something here. I thought the point of learning history was not to repeat it?

i don't think the past completely determines the present. the failure of one form of a model does not mean the whole idea is a failure. i think there are aspects of that tradition that still resonate in modern society and so learning from history is certainly not repeating it- learn what is still possible and use it.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

i don't think the past completely determines the present. the failure of one form of a model does not mean the whole idea is a failure. i think there are aspects of that tradition that still resonate in modern society and so learning from history is certainly not repeating it- learn what is still possible and use it.

Aspects such as what, though?

[bcbm]

Aspects such as what, though?

the desire for a total transformation of the world.

and hell, i think that brand of apocalyptic thought would be a lot more fun to see spread than this rapture/whatever shit happening now.