There is a few things that deserve clarification imo.:
For who it wasn’t clear from the pictures, this is not a natural grown forest. It is a pine tree plantage, and as such subject to getting cut. Also there exist plans from the 90s to develop the area for a factory. So the value of the forest is less in its quality as a natural habitat. This is a distinctive difference, from the protests around the Hambacher Forst for the expansion of a lignite mine, where people also built a treehouse camp. The Hambacher Forst was the closest to a natural forest you could get in Germany, before it was cut down for the coal mine.
In ecological terms the damage from the Tesla plant primarily comes from its water usage and possible water pollution in a region under high water stress. The violet means an extreme drought. I circled the region we are talking about, where the Tesla plant stands.
The act of sabotage temporarily cut off electricity to thousands of households in various parts of Berlin.
The households affected werent in Berlin, but in the area in Brandenburg. Berlin is all surrounded by the state of Brandenburg, with what we call the “Speckgürtel” the “fat belt” around it. That is many towns and villages directly outside the city limits, whose inhabitants usually work in the city. The Tesla area is kind of at the outer edge of that belt.
It also halted work at the Tesla factory for at least a week, likely costing the company hundreds of millions of euros.
It is important to note, that this is exclusively the claim of Tesla. It is not yet verified by third parties afaik.
They have a long history. It is also understandable originally as the goal was to achieve a certain level of energy independence in the cold war era (on both sides of the wall). But as that they are relicts of a time long past. We have the means to achieve high energy independence through renewables and every year the mines and coal plants run longer, the damage to the environment is increasing exponentially.
There is suburbs inside the city limits and suburbs outside the city limits. But there is also areas where on the city inside there is a field and right outside the city limits there are houses.
Often your only indication is a sign at the street reading that you enter or leave the city.
The biggest criticism I have seen of announcements-only signal groups is that every member can see every other member. This might be inconvenient for members who use their single phone number for purposes outside of activism.
I generally agree with CrimethInc articles so extensively that I I find it hard to pick at something in them.
This time, however, I find the claim…
Palestinian liberation will only come about as the result of a full-scale political crisis in the United States
…but I don’t find the evidence.
Firstly, Israel is not wholly dependent on US weapons, and according to most measures, it has already secured a military victory - at such cost in civilian lives that it’s a diplomatic defeat - everyone who can count the casualties and destruction knows that Israeli politicians gave zero fucks, alienated many supporters (they had great international support when Hamas attacked them) and very likely will receive an invitation to the ICC (hopefully along with Hamas leaders, so they can be tried together - reality may differ as both will try to avoid the court).
Also, if the claim were true, and a full-scale political crisis in the US was required for Palestinian liberation, then sadly, assuming a full political crisis incapacitates the government to some degree - there would be considerable risk that Palestinian liberation and Ukrainian independece sit on opposite plates of the scale. Myself, I don’t like the concept that one group’s liberation and another group’s freedom can be contradictory. However, it seems undeniable that the US war machine is currently supplying weapons for two main causes, one of them reasonably ethical (defending Ukraine) and the other not (bombing Gaza into a previous epoch of history).
Regarding what the US government actually does… I don’t read every article and post about diplomacy (so I could be missing a lot) but it appears to me that the US government is at the moment actively dissuading Israel from going into Rafah (the remaining comparatively less damaged settlement) - both by talk and refusal to send heavy air-dropped bombs.
This could be due to international pressure (the US has Arab allies and has to present some facade to them), could be due to protests (Biden surely worries about approaching elections). It could even work - but might not, because Israel has other sources of weapons and might empty its stockpiles of some categories to make the final push. :( Still, as a long-time and reliable donor, the US government has much leverage on Israel. Especially as it recently helped mitigate the Iranian missile and drone attack, downing Iranian munitions above Jordan and Iraq and perhaps elsewhere before they reached Israel. Biden can - overly simplified - send a message of “we assisted and protected you, we have your best interest in mind, and it’s in your best interest to stop now”. Netanyahu might listen or ignore the message.
In the end, however, a word of caution - whatever happens, whatever the US does - if Hamas returns to power, that will not be Palestinian liberation, because the Hamas guys weren’t liberating anyone. In fact, they were beating, imprisoning and killing some of their Palestinian political competitors for the old-fashioned goal of staying in power.
I literally cannot find the word “Hamas” in the article at all. It speaks of everyone except those who started the current war. That’s a massive oversight - oversight to the point of blinding oneself to a serious setback right around the corner. I’m not happy to see some of my comrades blinding themselves.
If one seeks a path to liberation, it has to include some recipe of not letting Hamas recover and return to power. And somehow getting lunatics out of Israeli government. The US has a role to play, and it may even be a decisive role, but as long as one side has rulers who prefer shooting civilians, and the other side has rulers who prefer to obliterate urban centers with bombardment… local political leadership must change, and no liberation will come unless it changes.
Prepare your home for extreme heat. Have boards and clips ready to protect window openings from hurricanes. Hydrate well before and during outdoor activities.
This is an awesome information resource! Also, free Palestine, and THE STATE CANNOT ERASE THE PEOPLE! THE PEOPLE WILL ERASE THE STATE! THE PEOPLE MUST ERASE THE STATE! YOU WANT WAR? YOU’LL GET WAR, MOTHERFUCKERS! Ahem. This is a very important subject that shouldn’t be ignored. The military industrial complex and their relationship to silencing protests has to be dealt with by the people. It’s completely unacceptable. The government (the state) won’t, because they’re fucking weak and greedy. It’s been going on for so long now. Always the time for the people to use that second amendment. Equalize American weaponry or the weaponry must be destroyed, and it has to stop being sent to murder people in unrelated countries. The state can’t keep doing this to people, It has to be stopped if it won’t stop itself.
A mother, angry about state motherfuckers, downvoted on mother’s day. Damn.
The second amendment: “WELL REGULATED MILITIA”, which is quite specifically a citizen’s army. I’m literally just advocating rights we were guaranteed at the beginning of our constitution. This shouldn’t actually be controversial. If you can’t regulate to an equal playing field, the only way to “well regulate” is by destruction. “Arms” isn’t exclusive to guns just as it isn’t exclusive to bombs. It is however made exclusive to THE PEOPLE’S RIGHT to “bear arms”. The people can find equality in arms that aren’t totally insane (such as the arms they had when the constitution was written), and that is an important part of saying “well regulated”. They designated the military as not an official part of “the people” (the citizenry), and the military itself technically has no right to bear arms. That is why it is within the purview of the second amendment, and arguably the government’s job, to destroy all arms not accessible to the people (and in the case of the military, arms not accessible to ALL PEOPLE). The very point of it is to assure equal weaponry so that the people are not forced from their freedom by the power of the larger societal structures, whether that be a state, a military, or capitalism.
The government owes the people respect, not the other way around. They put food on their table with our money, our work, whether we agree or not. The government’s money isn’t the government’s money, it’s the people’s money, distributed. If they’re going to take our money with or WITHOUT CONSENT and put it towards something else, especially something like murdering innocent people for what mostly seems to be a religious cause, we have to be allowed to complain. We have to be able to shut them down if they won’t change, as the people. The founding fathers intended for our system to change, or we wouldn’t even be able to make amendments. The constitution itself was an intended change from the static religious monarchy of Britain, which required civil war because it was static (it refused to equitably change).
The state, especially the federal government, technically only exists to regulate currency (and resulting industry) as the people need for maximum well-being. So the state needs to get their heads out of their ass and do it instead of trying to silence protestors during national crisis and every war or they’ll be, in a sense, fired. It’s not a matter of if, it’s a matter of when. Then again, if they were actually doing their fucking job, none of this shit would be happening. The constitution isn’t an unreasonable structure. The biggest problem is that we have let capitalism completely overwrite it, which is quite literally the opposite of what the constitution intended. Once again, “WELL REGULATED”.
The more I read and hear about this man, the more I see a reflection of myself. While our lives went in different directions, the descriptions of his upbringing and of how his beliefs changed over time mirror my own so closely that I feel like I’ve lost a brother I never had the pleasure of meeting. Even his friends’ accounts of his mannerisms remind me a lot of myself, and I feel the same guilt at how little I am able to do in the face of so much injustice.
It makes me incredibly sad and angry at the system that drove Aaron Bushnell to such an extreme act. That his life and body burned in order to inspire this feeling in me is devastating, but highlights that burning one’s life and body as well as the life and body of others is the routine and cold logic the state uses to maintain its hegemony.
No, no and no. Of course he was free to do what he wanted, but come on, can we please finally stop glorifying suicide for whatever reason? We cannot afford to lose more kindhearted people.
Sorry if my input offends anyone, but this makes me angry and sad. Anarchy is not supposed to be a cult of martyrs.
I understand your sentiment and appreciate it but I disagree with it. I’m not offended but I’m curious if you read all this. In no way is anyone glorifying suicide or encouraging it and his friend from the military states clearly that that’s not what this was. I didn’t read this is as glorifying or martyring him but honoring the message and who this man was. I’m sad as well but would rather do that without directing anger at those remembering him.
crimethinc.com
Hot