chobeat

solarpunk is inherently utopian. Utopias exist to inspire and to reflect on the present. It tells us that there can be a social system in which technology is good, but then if to be optimistic or not is very subjective. Many pessimistic people like utopias exactly because they highlight the ugliness of reality.

The core difference between longtermism and solarpunk is that longtermism stems from an utilitarian frame, while solarpunk rejects it. Radical utilitarianism like longtermist fashos and oligarchs gives them a way out to commit the worst crimes against humanity because of a supposed good that will materialize in a distant future. It's a moral free pass, exploiting the life of future humans (who cannot protest) to justify the oppression and exploitation of current humans (who are indeed protesting these assholes).

Solarpunk and longtermism are in no way on the same spectrum.

Techno-optimism has always been used to criticize this attitude, together with techno-chauvinism. Techno-utopianism is a less loaded term that might encompass more positive visions of technology, like the attitude towards space exploration in the 60's coming from the soviet union.

"Optimism" in general is not necessarily the term we want to reclaim from the right: it's wishy-washy, boring, mediocre. "I'm not going to do much, I'll be on autopilot, because tech is good and it will sort stuff out. I don't care too much about taking a position, beyond passively trusting tech". Optimism is the happy trust of a dog on a leash going for a walk.

I'm not part of Google. I'm not even American. You're taking a specific worst case to generalize for a global industry. Google is an anomaly in every regard.

To more directly speak to tech worker unionization, if you speak to the workers at most companies you will have the least productive organizing conversations you will ever experience. They are much, much more resistant to identifying workplace issues, much more sympathetic with management, much more willing to narc on organizing efforts, and much more likely to ideologically oppose unions.

Ah but I do, I'm part of tech workers coalition. For sure there's ground to gain, but in the last 5 years, or compared to my university years, it has been an immense change, change that is possibly still invisible from the outside. For instance, I now see tech workers a lot more prone to collective action than categories like designers, architects or chefs that are hopelessly fragmented.

This is narrative is getting more and more stale. It was definitely convincing maybe 15 years ago, now those same people are the ones spearheading unionization efforts in most US tech companies. Obviously it is always a mix of roles, but engineering roles are often the majority in most efforts, even just because they tend to be the majority of the company.

At every round of layoffs, the identity of the tech engineer as a tech worker gets stronger and stronger.

because they picked companies which haven't yet formed a union or just formed a minority union (like Google). Many other tech companies have already unionized.

On top of that, some of these companies have wild union busting strategies.

Also Blind is a shitty source.

you use "luddite" as if it's an insult. History proved luddites were right in their demands and they were fighting the good fight.

we do, and anybody telling you "it's complicated" has an agenda.

Please yankee, don't make everything happening in the world about you

Gnosticism is by definition the epitome of duality. That said, conflict with a reactionary entity doesn't imply you're not reactionary. Russia and Ukraine are at war with each other and they are both very reactionary, becoming even worse due to the needs produced by such conflict.

Also, hackers tend to hold libertarian (in the European sense) values and that's how they pick their targets for direct action. When I say they are reactionary, they are reactionary in effect, not in intent. That makes them even more problematic, because it's not immediately obvious what's the problem.

It would be quite a long argument, but I suggest TechGnosis by Erik Davis and this article: https://www.are.na/block/24206425

tl;dr: hacker culture is grounded in gnostic, individualistic californian hippie culture, and shares root with what is now the dominant, reactionary ideology of big tech moguls, ketamine cryptocolonialists, business white supremacists. One key tenet of hacker culture is the power of the individual super-human brain power to reshape entire societies through the production of disruptive technology. Mr. Robot tv series is one such example of said mindset. It preaches the superiority of the world of minds and the virtual over the material. The material is subject to the virtual and the virtual is where the real stuff is happening, where there's a real confrontation of power (the hacker vs the system, disruptors vs established businesses, out-of-the-box thinkers vs corporate drones). This mimics gnostic beliefs very closely. It is reactionary because it is individualistic, because it erases material conditions and collective action, but it also just operates from such a simplified worldview that it is impossible to adhere to if you have a very basic understanding of disciplines like sociology, history or politics. It's just not how the world works.