Left-Wing Extremists Behind Berlin Arson Attack

[Eastside Revolt]

http://anarchistnews.org/?q=node/14655

Political activists have claimed responsibility for a cable fire that caused major disruption to Berlin commuter train traffic and mobile phone service this week. Police say the attack signals a new escalation in left-wing terrorism in the country.

In what security officials are calling a significant escalation in the scale of left-wing violence in Germany, an major arson attack on cables disrupted rail traffic in Berlin on Monday, disturbing S-Bahn suburban as well as regional train service in the capital. The cable fire also led to delays on some long-distance trains.

http://anarchistnews.org/files/pictures/2011/armored_hotdog.jpg
A left-wing group claimed responsibility for the fire at the Ostkreuz station in eastern Berlin in an online statement, saying the act was a protest against nuclear power and what it described as militarism and racism. No arrests have yet been made in connection with the attack, but investigators said they believe the statement is authentic and that evidence points to a targeted attack.

"After all the catastrophes, we are fed up," the statement read. "There is nothing left to negotiate when it comes to an immediate exit from nuclear power." The group claimed that German national railway Deutsche Bahn, which operates Berlin's S-Bahn service, implicitly supports the atomic industry by providing access to its tracks for nuclear waste transports.
'The Scene Should Be Taken More Seriously'

The country's German Police Federation (GdP) union called the fire and resulting chaos a "new level of escalation in left-wing extremist terror," demanding increased efforts to fight such anarchist groups, who are called Autonomen in Germany and widely referred to as the "Black Bloc" abroad.
"Berlin faces a new security challenge," GdP leader Bernhard Witthaut said in a statement. "The Red Army Faction also started out with so-called harmless violence against objects. But later people were murdered."

The incident is just the latest in a string of attacks attributed to left-wing extremists, Witthaut said, citing a similar cable fire in November 2010 and the firebombing of a Berlin police station just last month.

"The domestic intelligence agency's warnings that the most violent left-wing extremists live in Berlin -- and that the scene is becoming even more aggressive -- should be taken much more seriously," he said.

6,600 Extremists Capable of Violence

In terms of police dealings, left-wing extremists tend to be a bigger problem for German security officials than neo-Nazis. The anarchists are notorious for setting luxury cars ablaze in Berlin and Hamburg and attacking police.

Interior Ministry criminal statistics for 2010 released this month showed that while politically motivated crime dropped overall by some 13.4 percent compared to the previous year, left-wing extremist crime surpassed that of the right and reached the second-highest level since 2001.

Germany's Interior Ministry estimates the country is home to around 31,600 left-wing extremists, mostly members or supporters of parties and organizations with revolutionary-Marxist leanings. Of those, an estimated 6,600 are believed to be "potentially violent," with a large concentration residing in the capital city.

Police in Berlin have recently made some progress in fighting left-wing extremism, with the number of arson attacks on cars attributed to anarchists down to 54 in 2010 from 145 a year earlier. According to the German news agency DPA, police attributed the success to both closer monitoring and new thinking on the part of extremists, who were widely criticized for indiscriminately burning cars -- not just those of the rich, but also the poor and people with modest incomes.

Still, Monday's attack shows that the problem persists. An unnamed S-Bahn employee told the local daily Berliner Zeitung that the incident is the latest in a series of what appear to be targeted disruptions of key control points in the commuter rail network.

"Recently there have been a number of incidents, mainly at critical positions," he said. "Somebody knows what they are doing and wants to cause serious damage."

Despite overnight efforts to repair the cables, train service remained limited along eastern Berlin routes on Tuesday, and passengers were advised to find alternative transportation.

-- kla, with wire reports

Anarchism in Germany:
http://revolte.blogsport.eu/
http://directactionde.blogspot.com/
https://directactionde.ucrony.net/de/
http://unruhen.blogspot.com/
http://unruhen.wordpress.com/
http://andiewaisendesexistierenden.noblogs.org/
http://tearsandangergreece.blogsport.de/
http://noprisonnostate.blogsport.de/
http://www.abc-berlin.net/
https://radikalrl.wordpress.com/
http://www.xs4all.nl/~tank/radikal/ (http://www.xs4all.nl/%7Etank/radikal/)
http://anarchistische-aktion-zentralschweiz.over-blog.de/

[Ocean Seal]

In terms of police dealings, left-wing extremists tend to be a bigger problem for German security officials than neo-Nazis. The anarchists are notorious for setting luxury cars ablaze in Berlin and Hamburg and attacking police.

As opposed to neo-nazis who assault immigrants and and routinely intimidate anyone who looks or thinks differently. But hey at least the police know where their allegiances lie.
I'm curious about the attacks though. Why are they anti-nuclear power? For what its worth there are a lot of worse things in this world. Also racism and militarism do exist in Germany, but was this attack in response to something specific or just in militarism /racism in general.

[Eastside Revolt]

As opposed to neo-nazis who assault immigrants and and routinely intimidate anyone who looks or thinks differently. But hey at least the police know where their allegiances lie.
I'm curious about the attacks though. Why are they anti-nuclear power? For what its worth there are a lot of worse things in this world. Also racism and militarism do exist in Germany, but was this attack in response to something specific or just in militarism /racism in general.

The anti-nuclear struggle has been an important rallying point for struggles in Germany, side-by-side with anti-racism/militarism.

Read "The Subversion of Politics" for more info.

The anti-nuclear struggle also faced a lot of repression recently when trying to stop a nuclear waste shipment (by train).

I frankly am not going to change my position on nuclear power, so I'm not gonna get into that argument here, much you might check out whats going on with the Fukushima disaster.

[Os Cangaceiros]

A lot of the info I've heard and read regarding the dangers of nuclear power have made me seriously doubt that it's as dangerous as the hysteria would indicate, honestly.

[Jose Gracchus]

The idea a global workers' society could somehow navigate modern standards of living without fossil fuels OR nuclear fission in the foreseeable future is simply anti-scientific fanaticism and madness, unjustified by any supported argument. Not a single person I've ever challenged to produce the evidence you can supply the energy needs necessary to maintain standards of living without relying on one or the other for the foreseeable future as a significant source, has been able to do so.

The idea antics like this should rank anywhere near the top 20 things class-struggle anarchism should be raising in Germany is preposterous.

[bcbm]

i don't know what "global workers society" or "modern standards of living" have to do with the communist project

[Dunk]

The country's German Police Federation (GdP) union called the fire and resulting chaos a "new level of escalation in left-wing extremist terror," demanding increased efforts to fight such anarchist groups, who are called Autonomen in Germany and widely referred to as the "Black Bloc" abroad.Anyone else see the potential here for those in power to take note? Immediate arrest of anyone who dresses in all black at protests?

[Eastside Revolt]

Anyone else see the potential here for those in power to take note? Immediate arrest of anyone who dresses in all black at protests?

Same shit as always....

[LewisQ]

"Berlin faces a new security challenge," GdP leader Bernhard Witthaut said in a statement. "The Red Army Faction also started out with so-called harmless violence against objects. But later people were murdered."

If we're being melodramatic, the Nazis also started out with hysterical newspaper articles denouncing those with "revolutionary-Marxist leanings". But later, a people were murdered.

[Cleansing Conspiratorial Revolutionary Flame]

While a single arson itself is meaningless, an arson that is used to show the solidarity of the globalized Working Class and truly at its own shows the destruction of the currently existing culture and the Capitalist State-- Is meaningful and to be noted as progress and a propaganda of the deed.


If we're being melodramatic, the Nazis also started out with hysterical newspaper articles denouncing those with "revolutionary-Marxist leanings". But later, a people were murdered.
More or less this is what the Red Army Faction had acted against, the Red Army Faction had acted against the rise of Fascism and had used itself to combat Imperialism in the broad sense each day-- Declaring a front against the Capitalist State that was against the will of the Working Class.

Now-- Yet again, Germany fears the rise and rebirth of an organization that represented three generations of Anti-Capitalist and Anti-Imperialist action.


http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,19655,00.jpg http://diepresse.com/images/uploads/8/3/8/436280/thumbDi_mohnhaupt20081209141834.jpg http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_fOBnx3nYQ3k/RsWwp8nF__I/AAAAAAAAAis/ax8DCAHO8VQ/s400/20070817__GermanyRedArmyFaction%7E1_Gallery.jpg

While Imperialism and Neo-Colonialism are allowed to act on a rampage... Birgit and Andrea still lie within German Prisons as prisoners of Political Action.

[Jose Gracchus]

i don't know what "global workers society" or "modern standards of living" have to do with the communist project

Yeah, I'm sure stand-alone agricultural communes worked by primitive implements and windmills and animal labor will be just wonderful. Why don't you take up the hoe yourself, and stop lecturing at me through a device that consumes 50 watts almost certainly by coal or gas burning. Try taking a physics class.

Didn't know communism was supposed to be possible without labor-saving technology. Physics tells us this tends to be intrinsically energy-intensive. But hey why bother replying when you can make some clueless prolier-than-thou remark. :rolleyes:

I'm sorry I said "global workers' society". I meant communism in the Marxian sense, which means a technological and industrial society. That means big turbines and electrical lines.

[Rafiq]

Widerstand, was that you? :cool:

[JustMovement]

Surely the dog-in-chain-mail picture was posted there by mistake?

[RedSunRising]

i don't know what "global workers society" or "modern standards of living" have to do with the communist project

I dont wanna live in some sterile Star Trek world and I agree that modern living standards are not essentially linked to modern first world standard of living, however a global society in this day and age is necessary for the communist project because as long as they have to live with the threat of capitalist invasion or subversion there are bound to be distortions in societies where the working class has come to power.

[bcbm]

Yeah, I'm sure stand-alone agricultural communes worked by primitive implements and windmills and animal labor will be just wonderful. Why don't you take up the hoe yourself, and stop lecturing at me through a device that consumes 50 watts almost certainly by coal or gas burning. Try taking a physics class.

Didn't know communism was supposed to be possible without labor-saving technology. Physics tells us this tends to be intrinsically energy-intensive. But hey why bother replying when you can make some clueless prolier-than-thou remark. :rolleyes:

I'm sorry I said "global workers' society". I meant communism in the Marxian sense, which means a technological and industrial society. That means big turbines and electrical lines.

you assume an awful lot. i don't remember saying anything about primitive implements or animal labor or windmills, but i think you have a limited vision of what a "technological and industrial society" can look like

[Jose Gracchus]

Why don't you take up the challenge I previously laid out, then, and actually explain in concrete terms what you mean and how it is possible, rather than just making drive-by flippant remarks?

I used to be in school for energy economics, I can tell you "we'll just build renewables and not do things like the bourgeoisie lol" is not a real answer. There has to be a real physical alternative for communist workers' when they overturn society, or the project will fail. It will only succeed to the extent it delivers on human needs, and in a fashion superior to that of the capitalists.

[bcbm]

i don't mean anything specific it isn't for me to decide but i don't think "living standards" in a communist world would look anything like "modern living standards" and its a kind of absurd thing to push for, its comparing the hell of our modern world to something that bears no resemblence but idk i didn't take energy economics and i dropped out of college so i guess i will leave it to the experts

[RedSunRising]

i don't mean anything specific it isn't for me to decide but i don't think "living standards" in a communist world would look anything like "modern living standards" and its a kind of absurd thing to push for, its comparing the hell of our modern world to something that bears no resemblence but idk i didn't take energy economics and i dropped out of college so i guess i will leave it to the experts

I agree with what you wrote there, obessesion with productive forces and living standards is Trotskyite-Kruschevite-Dengist revisionism, however how can you have a fully communist society which isnt global, which isnt threatened by capitalist forces?

[bcbm]

I agree with what you wrote there, obessesion with productive forces and living standards is Trotskyite-Kruschevite-Dengist revisionism, however how can you have a fully communist society which isnt global, which isnt threatened by capitalist forces?

you can't :(

[Cleansing Conspiratorial Revolutionary Flame]

I agree with what you wrote there, obessesion with productive forces and living standards is Trotskyite-Kruschevite-Dengist revisionism, however how can you have a fully communist society which isnt global, which isnt threatened by capitalist forces?
'How can you have a fully communist society which isnt global, which isnt threatened by capitalist forces?'
Through the implementation of Autonomous Communist Zones in which Communistic Economic Conditions are founded along side the Socialist State that seeks to act as a guardian for these Autonomous Zones ensuring that Capitalist Production Forces are not capable of reverting the progress within the Autonomous Zones through the destruction of these Autonomous Zones.

However, in order to truly achieve a fully Communist Society what is quite necessary would be a global case of Socialism that allows for these Autonomous Zones to be created on a massive global scale.

Which allows for in the end:

*The Communist Autonomous Zones to devour the Socialist Zones and the state to be disintegrated through Democratic Opposition from the Communist Autonomous Zones to fully create the existing Worker's State to be a fully Communist Economic Zone.
* Communist Autonomous Zones to prove themselves in this situation to be the forces of progress and to reach efficiency through experimentation and practice.



you can't :(

An Autonomous Zone alongside a Socialist Workers State would be capable of creating the foundations of Communism and implementing Communist Economic and Social relations while the Socialist State continues to exist.

[RedSunRising]

i don't know what "global workers society" or "modern standards of living" have to do with the communist project

Okiedok....Thats why I asked.

[caramelpence]

I agree with what you wrote there, obessesion with productive forces and living standards is Trotskyite-Kruschevite-Dengist revisionism, however how can you have a fully communist society which isnt global, which isnt threatened by capitalist forces?

If you think an "obsession with productive forces" is problematic then do you also think that socialism can come into being at any point in history simply through the power of will and consciousness alone, rather than being the product of historical development and the development of the productive forces over time? If you accept this, then why do you situate yourself within the Marxist tradition, given that Marx was conscious of capitalism's progressive historic role and regarded socialism as immanent in the historical process, and explicitly critiqued those such as the Utopian Socialists who abstracted from history and the objective constraints set down by historical conditions? Moreover, if you think that it is also problematic to be "obsessed" with living standards and that high living standards are not a necessary part of a socialist society then where exactly does the moral superiority of socialism lie? How would it be possible for human beings to live fulfilling lives and develop themselves as individuals if mankind does not have the capacity to control nature and provide for a wide range of wants?

I am genuinely interested in your answers to these questions.

[Aspiring Humanist]

It's good what they're doing, but I don't see the link between commuter trains and militarism/racism :confused:

[bcbm]

Okiedok....Thats why I asked.

my point there was that communism would not be a "global workers society" because communism will destroy all classes, even workers


If you think an "obsession with productive forces" is problematic then do you also think that socialism can come into being at any point in history

yes


simply through the power of will and consciousness alone

no


rather than being the product of historical development and the development of the productive forces over time?

the development of capitalism's productive forces has given us a more refined capitalism, not communism


If you accept this, then why do you situate yourself within the Marxist tradition, given that Marx was conscious of capitalism's progressive historic role and regarded socialism as immanent in the historical process,

one need not believe everything marx wrote to be a marxist


Moreover, if you think that it is also problematic to be "obsessed" with living standards and that high living standards are not a necessary part of a socialist society then where exactly does the moral superiority of socialism lie?

you missed the point, and there is no "moral" superiority


How would it be possible for human beings to live fulfilling lives and develop themselves as individuals if mankind does not have the capacity to control nature and provide for a wide range of wants?

no human being has ever lived a fulfilling life?

[Cleansing Conspiratorial Revolutionary Flame]

It's good what they're doing, but I don't see the link between commuter trains and militarism/racism :confused:
The action is to reveal that society is inherently at its own indifferent while these issues are plaguing it-- The action at its own represents the need for continued resistance, while this alone may simply be a Arson Attack, the Arson Attack is simply being used as a method to convey this form of resistance into the masses and show the disposition that should be had towards these issues that are continually plaguing society.

[RedSunRising]

Moreover, if you think that it is also problematic to be "obsessed" with living standards and that high living standards are not a necessary part of a socialist society then where exactly does the moral superiority of socialism lie? How would it be possible for human beings to live fulfilling lives and develop themselves as individuals if mankind does not have the capacity to control nature and provide for a wide range of wants?

I am genuinely interested in your answers to these questions.

The moral superiority of socialism lies in the over coming of human alienation from themselves and the recovery of community or species being, not in giving everyone mobile phones and super duper wide screen TVs. A lot of consumerism is driven by emotional needs steeming from people's disconnect from themselves and other people, the need to have things in order to prove their worth, because of a generalized insecurity, etc. Plus there is the issue of whether its ecologically possible for all the world's population to have the living standards of the decadent western middle classes. Capitalist development has placed humanity where it can create a global community, but lets not forget the immense human cost of capitalist development for day one, and how capitalist development was and is often resisted by people for very good reasons.

[caramelpence]

no

Then what are the conditions for communism, if it can come into being at any point in history regardless of the level of the productive forces, but will and consciousness are not in themselves sufficient conditions?


the development of capitalism's productive forces has given us a more refined capitalism, not communism

This is true in the sense that we live in a capitalist society, but that doesn't mean that capitalism isn't historically progressive or that communism doesn't rely on a developed productive apparatus. Capitalism is the most dynamic mode of production in human history in terms of its ability to develop the productive forces and it's because of capitalism's dynamic role that we now possess the technical capacity to achieve material abundance (even if that capacity is deployed in a highly inefficient and destructive way in actual capitalist societies) and it is also capitalism that has produced a social force with the ability to carry out the liberation of humanity through the pursuit of its own immediate interests, in the form of the working class. The creation of the material preconditions for communism under capitalism is analogous to other historic transitions in that the birth of capitalism was itself a product of social and economic changes under feudalism, such as the growth of the towns and the development of commerce and manufacture outside the confines of the guild system.

Of course all of this is rather irrelevant if you think that communism won't or shouldn't be a society of material abundance and that there are social forces other than the working class that can introduce communism.


one need not believe everything marx wrote to be a marxist

I agree, and Marx was also wrong in much of his analysis. However, it seems hard to deny that Marx's thought possesses a number of basic premises and that it is hard to see someone as a Marxist if they straightforwardly reject those premises. Marx is particularly insistent that communism is immanent in the historical process rather than being outside of history and that communism depends on a set of material preconditions, especially a highly developed productive apparatus, for its viability. It was on that basis that Marx harshly critiqued those socialists who articulated a romantic critique of capitalism rather than acknowledging capitalism's progressive historic role or who saw communism as the product of the subjective will alone, independent of objective conditions.


you missed the point, and there is no "moral" superiority

In what way is communism a more desirable society compared to capitalism if not at least partly because it provides better living standards, in the sense of meeting a wider range of wants?


no human being has ever lived a fulfilling life?

Capitalism and other forms of class society frustrate human fulfillment in that they do not allow human beings to develop and express their essentially human capacities and wants, so in that sense, yes, I do hold that no human being has ever lived a fulfilling life, and that communism is the human project.


The moral superiority of socialism lies in the over coming of human alienation from themselves

The concept of human nature that underpins Marx's account of alienation embodies the view that man expresses himself and leads a fulfilling life through making use of the natural world in order to produce things that share and are an expression of his own essence, and which can also be appreciated by other human beings, and so capitalism is alienating, from that perspective, because it involves the products of human labour coming to dominate their producers, such that they are seen by the producers as powers in themselves, rather than as human in origin. Given that premise, how would a society with a grossly undeveloped productive apparatus be able to give free expression to man's active nature, given that man would be dominated by the natural world, and it would be necessary, without the aid of labour-reducing technology, for man to spend large amounts of labour time on producing the basic necessities that societies need to survive, like food, as opposed to engaging in genuinely fulfilling and expressive activities? In simple terms, how can we all be artists if we have to spend ten hours each day working in the fields with cattle and ploughs?


A lot of consumerism is driven by emotional needs steeming from people's disconnect from themselves and other people, the need to have things in order to prove their worth

This may true (I'm hesitant to accept anti-consumerist wants because I feel they have a very patronizing and ascetic tone to them) but Marx's account of alienation also involves an emphasis on the ways that capitalism limits the development and expansion of human wants, so it is not as if an un-alienated world would merely involve the eradication of existing "false" needs, it would also, at least on Marx's account, involve the expansion of genuine needs and capacities far beyond basic biological needs.


Plus there is the issue of whether its ecologically possible for all the world's population to have the living standards of the decadent western middle classes.

This is an excellent example of how environmentalism can be used to cast doubt on mankind's innovative capacities and justify limitations on consumption and living standards. As a humanist, I think that the living standards of "the decadent western middle classes" are not good enough for the world's population, I think everyone should and could live in a huge apartment or villa rather than in a semi-detatched house and that everyone should and could have a Ferrari rather than a hybrid, or whatever. It really depends on your attitude towards the natural world and the capacities of human beings - if you think that the natural world is fundamentally vulnerable to human action and that the ability of human beings to offer high living standards to large numbers of people without encountering unacceptable environmental costs is highly limited, then I can see why you would be wary of technological advancement and mass consumption, but I have a more optimistic view of human capacities, so I welcome the prospect and possibility of extending mass consumption to everyone and increasing living standards beyond the levels made possible by capitalism.

[bcbm]

Then what are the conditions for communism, if it can come into being at any point in history regardless of the level of the productive forces, but will and consciousness are not in themselves sufficient conditions?

dunno haven't done it yet


This is true in the sense that we live in a capitalist society, but that doesn't mean that capitalism isn't historically progressive or that communism doesn't rely on a developed productive apparatus. Capitalism is the most dynamic mode of production in human history in terms of its ability to develop the productive forces and it's because of capitalism's dynamic role that we now possess the technical capacity to achieve material abundance (even if that capacity is deployed in a highly inefficient and destructive way in actual capitalist societies) and it is also capitalism that has produced a social force with the ability to carry out the liberation of humanity through the pursuit of its own immediate interests, in the form of the working class. The creation of the material preconditions for communism under capitalism is analogous to other historic transitions in that the birth of capitalism was itself a product of social and economic changes under feudalism, such as the growth of the towns and the development of commerce and manufacture outside the confines of the guild system.

i didn't read all this but i don't think capitalism was historically progressive i think it was and is a nightmare for the human species


Of course all of this is rather irrelevant if you think that communism won't or shouldn't be a society of material abundance and that there are social forces other than the working class that can introduce communism.

communism should be opulent as fuck and probably only workers can make the break but it still has nothing to do with modern living standards everything will chnage


I agree, and Marx was also wrong in much of his analysis. However, it seems hard to deny that Marx's thought possesses a number of basic premises and that it is hard to see someone as a Marxist if they straightforwardly reject those premises. Marx is particularly insistent that communism is immanent in the historical process rather than being outside of history and that communism depends on a set of material preconditions, especially a highly developed productive apparatus, for its viability. It was on that basis that Marx harshly critiqued those socialists who articulated a romantic critique of capitalism rather than acknowledging capitalism's progressive historic role or who saw communism as the product of the subjective will alone, independent of objective conditions.

i think communism is dependent on conditions i don't think only capitalism has/will create those conditions


In what way is communism a more desirable society compared to capitalism if not at least partly because it provides better living standards, in the sense of meeting a wider range of wants?

if i could just nap more and have more days off work and not have to pay for beers my standard of living would already be skyrocketing


Capitalism and other forms of class society frustrate human fulfillment in that they do not allow human beings to develop and express their essentially human capacities and wants, so in that sense, yes, I do hold that no human being has ever lived a fulfilling life, and that communism is the human project.

fair nuf but i don't think having more shit correlates to humanity for itself

[Reznov]

One question, why is there a picutre of a cute little dog in the beginning of the article?

[Jose Gracchus]

i don't mean anything specific it isn't for me to decide but i don't think "living standards" in a communist world would look anything like "modern living standards" and its a kind of absurd thing to push for, its comparing the hell of our modern world to something that bears no resemblence but idk i didn't take energy economics and i dropped out of college so i guess i will leave it to the experts

What I'm trying to get at isn't that I'm some brilliant expert and the workers got to take it from me and my genius, just that productivity/acre of arable land is something which today we are highly dependent on energy inputs, like major machinery (tractors, combines) and chemical inputs (fertilizers, other high-technology tools), and not something easily substituted for, when we're started with like what, maybe 10% global production from renewables?

I think the workers in some day's workers' committees, councils, and congresses will need to be able to turn it intuitive answers that help deliver a firm sense that the workers will be able to meet their basic material needs better than the bourgeoisie. A conception which treats flippantly the idea of how the groceries will remain filled for the next few months or the streetlights remain on, or the like, while maybe we discuss the most socially radical social agro-industrial communes imaginable for the next months, will not get taken seriously by real working people with real needs.


The moral superiority of socialism lies in the over coming of human alienation from themselves and the recovery of community or species being, not in giving everyone mobile phones and super duper wide screen TVs. A lot of consumerism is driven by emotional needs steeming from people's disconnect from themselves and other people, the need to have things in order to prove their worth, because of a generalized insecurity, etc. Plus there is the issue of whether its ecologically possible for all the world's population to have the living standards of the decadent western middle classes. Capitalist development has placed humanity where it can create a global community, but lets not forget the immense human cost of capitalist development for day one, and how capitalist development was and is often resisted by people for very good reasons.

I don't care about I Phones. I think the workers will want to know how the groceries and markets, be they renamed "dispensaries" or whatever, will remain filled. How the street lights will remain on. In the Third World, they should have an answer for how they will get these basic services, that the workers have been unjustly denied, consistently.

[bcbm]

What I'm trying to get at isn't that I'm some brilliant expert and the workers got to take it from me and my genius, just that productivity/acre of arable land is something which today we are highly dependent on energy inputs, like major machinery (tractors, combines) and chemical inputs (fertilizers, other high-technology tools), and not something easily substituted for, when we're started with like what, maybe 10% global production from renewables?

I think the workers in some day's workers' committees, councils, and congresses will need to be able to turn it intuitive answers that help deliver a firm sense that the workers will be able to meet their basic material needs better than the bourgeoisie. A conception which treats flippantly the idea of how the groceries will remain filled for the next few months or the streetlights remain on, or the like, while maybe we discuss the most socially radical social agro-industrial communes imaginable for the next months, will not get taken seriously by real working people with real needs.

i don't think it makes sense to have a plan to meet needs in conditions we can't know. humans are smart, we'll figure it out. or we won't. but it isn't something that can be figured out now.