×
Create a new article
Write your page title here:
We currently have 901 articles on Polcompball Wiki. Type your article name above or create one of the articles listed here!



    Polcompball Wiki
    Polcompball Wiki
    901Articles
      Recent changes
    in:
    Stubs, Ideologies, Non-Quadrant,
    and 5 more

    Technogaianism also called Eco-Transhumanism or Green Transhumanism shortened to Eco+ and Green+ is a general, although not necessarily, an economically and culturally left-wing ideology that is the child of Transhumanism and Environmentalism.

    Technogaianism believes that the preservation of Earth's Natural Habitat would only get easier with the creation of better technology and thus the pursuit of Humanity reaching space colonization and environmentalism is complementary as dirty industries can be moved off-Earth. Many followers of this ideology are eco-anarchists, meaning they believe that a technogaianist future cannot truly happen without the abolition of the state and capital.

    Variants

    Ecomodernism

    Ecomodernism is a belief within capitalist circles that states that new, innovative technologies are the key to solving the climate crisis.  

    Solarpunk

    Solarpunk is an art genre and movement that envisions a post-capitalist, post-hierarchy, world where humanity sees itself as part of nature, while clean energy solves environmental challenges such as climate change and pollution.

    Solarpunk believes that greenwashing is just a way for capitalism to appropriate the aesthetics of nature for its own purposes. The type of world described in solarpunk is, according to its followers, intimately linked with anarchist thought. The music associated with solarpunk is uplifting to provide hope in opposition to the pessimism associated with climate change. According to its followers, the only way we can achieve a better world is to visualize its aesthetically beautiful results.

    Techno-Agrarianism

    W.I.P

    Lunarpunk

    Lunarpunk has been created as the yin to Solarpunk's yang, with neopagan spirituality complimenting Solarpunk's science, bioluminescence complimenting Solarpunk's solar power, and individualism complimenting Solarpunk's communalism. It has a fundamental goal of living in harmony with nature and going back to the land while embracing advanced technology. They also are aligned with the anarchist movement, due to opposing hierarchy and capitalism, and generally supporting anti-colonialism, gender equality, racial equality, and LGBT rights.

    Agro-Industrialism

    Agro-Industrialism is a view, beginning with the Utopian Socialists, that sees the tension between characteristics of agrarian and industrial societies as a dialectic that will result in a seamless synthesis, which integrates agricultural labor with industrial labor, which most advocates believe will happen in a post-capitalist society, having usually, but not always, abolished the division of labor that separates the two societies. Some advocates, like Kropotkin and Karl Marx, also believe that in order for this transition to happen, it would have to integrate intellectual labor, and manual labor, into one singular productive totality. Ultimately, the means and views of what this society look like vary between most advocates of it, but they all agree on the integration and synthesis of agrarian and industrial economy.

    Personality

    Technogaianism's personality is simply a mixture of Transhumanist and Environmentalist personalities. Though they seem incongruous to others, Technogaianism tries to make it work. He’s friends with Archeofuturism but they don’t hang out together in public because otherwise Technogainism wouldn’t be taken seriously.

    How to Draw

    Flag of Technogaianism

    This design is based on a flag by u/NovaInvicta

    1. Draw a ball
    2. Fill the ball green
    3. Draw the "h+" logo in white
    4. Around the h+ logo draw leaves coming out
    5. Draw an orange visor
    Color NameHEXRGB
     Green#00C016rgb(0, 192, 22)
     Orange#FF9800rgb(255, 152, 0)
     White#FFFFFFrgb(255, 255, 255)


    Saved Relationships

    Positive

    • Transhumanism - The key to the future.
    • Environmentalism - The way to make sure we still have a future.
    • Archeofuturism - You love tech and nature, my great techno primitive friend! Too many people have called you an oxymoron, I can’t be associated with you
    • Eco-Anarchism - Most of my followers are you.
    • Eco-Capitalism - One of the better capitalists.
    • Eco-Socialism - Good ideas but needs to be more forward-thinking.
    • Bull Moose Progressivism - Thanks for all those parks.
    • Lee Kuan Yew Thought - The city you helped create is literally my dreamland.
    • Scientocracy - The science is overwhelmingly clear that climate change is real and that we need to do something about it.
    • Technoliberalism - Also wants to use technology to save the environment.
    • Environmental Globalization - Climate change is a global issue and requires global cooperation.
    • Democratic Transhumanism - Another transhumanist who's also good on environmental issues.
    • Queer Anarchism ( Lunarpunk) - Restoring sexuality requires going outside of the restrictions civilization places on sexuality.
    • Anarcha-Feminism ( Lunarpunk) - Same as with anqueer. Smash the patriarchy!
    • Anarcho-Individualism ( Lunarpunk) - I like how you are Anarchist, but humans are social animals.
    • Welfarism - We can all work together and help each other for the better future no matter who they are.
    • Christian Democracy - Some of the followers followed your teachings and as long as you follow them to bring everyone together in peace.

    Mixed

    Negative

    • Kakistocracy - The reason why people still deny the existence of climate change.
    • Corporatocracy - The reason climate change still exists.
    • Right-Wing Populism - Aren't you just him again?
    • Anarcho-Primitivism and National Primitivism - "Oooga booga, technology causes climate change". You savages don't know what you're talking about, technology is the way to save the environment! You're just jealous!!!
    • Primalism - Same as above, but worse because it is misantropic.
    • Neoluddism - Reverting to pre-industrial technology is not necessary to save humanity.
    • Climate Skepticism - I'll turn you into biofuel.
    • Post-Humanism - The purpose of technology is to save biological organisms, not exterminate them.

    Further Information

    Wikipedia

    Articles

    Youtube

    Communities

    References

    1. ↑ Anti-Dühring (1877), Part III: Socialism: "Nor is the abolition of the old division of labour a demand which could only be carried through to the detriment of the productivity of labour. On the contrary. Thanks to modern industry it has become a condition of production itself. “The employment of machinery does away with the necessity of crystallising the distribution of various groups of workmen among the different kinds of machines after the manner of Manufacture, by the constant annexation of a particular man to a particular function. Since the motion of the whole system does not proceed from the workman, but from the machinery, a change of persons can take place at any time without an interruption of the work... Lastly, the quickness with which machine work is learnt by young people, does away with the necessity of bringing up for exclusive employment by machinery, a special class of operatives.” But while the capitalist mode of employment of machinery necessarily perpetuates the old division of labour with its fossilised specialisation, although it has become superfluous from a technical standpoint, the machinery itself rebels against this anachronism. The technical basis of modern industry is revolutionary. ”By means of machinery, chemical processes and other methods, it is continually causing changes not only in the technical basis of production, but also in the functions of the labourer, and in the social combinations of the labour-process. At the same time, it thereby also revolutionises the division of labour within the society, and incessantly launches masses of capital and of workpeople from one branch of production to another. Modern industry, by its very nature, therefore necessitates variation of labour, fluency of function, universal mobility of the labourer... We have seen how this absolute contradiction ... vents its rage in the incessant human sacrifices from among the working-class, in the most reckless squandering of labour-power, and in the devastation caused by social anarchy. This is the negative side. But if, on the one hand, variation of work at present imposes itself after the manner of an overpowering natural law, and with the blindly destructive action of a natural law that meets with resistance at all points, modern industry, on the other hand, through its catastrophes imposes the necessity of recognising, as a fundamental law of production, variation of work, consequently fitness of the labourer for varied work, consequently the greatest possible development of his varied aptitudes. It becomes a question of life and death for society to adapt the mode of production to the normal functioning of this law. Modern industry makes it a question of life and death to replace the monstrosity of a destitute working population kept in reserve at the disposal of capital for the changing needs of exploitation with the absolute availability of man for the changing requirements of labour; to replace what is virtually a mere fragment of the individual, the mere carrier of a social detail-function, with the fully developed individual, to whom the different social functions are so many alternating modes of activity” ( Marx, Capital).
      Modern industry, which has taught us to convert the movement of molecules, something more or less universally feasible, into the movement of masses for technical purposes, has thereby to a considerable extent freed production from restrictions of locality. Water-power was local; steam-power is free. While water-power is necessarily rural, steam-power is by no means necessarily urban. It is capitalist utilisation which concentrates it mainly in the towns and changes factory villages into factory towns. But in so doing it at the same time undermines the conditions under which it operates. The first requirement of the steam-engine, and a main requirement of almost all branches of production in modern industry, is relatively pure water. But the factory town transforms all water into stinking manure. However much therefore urban concentration is a basic condition of capitalist production, each individual industrial capitalist is constantly striving to get away from the large towns necessarily created by this production, and to transfer his plant to the countryside. This process can be studied in detail in the textile industry districts of Lancashire and Yorkshire; modern capitalist industry is constantly bringing new large towns into being there by constant flight from the towns into the country. The situation is similar in the metal-working districts where, in part, other causes produce the same effects.
      Once more, only the abolition of the capitalist character of modern industry can bring us out of this new vicious circle, can resolve this contradiction in modern industry, which is constantly reproducing itself. Only a society which makes it possible for its productive forces to dovetail harmoniously into each other on the basis of one single vast plan can allow industry to be distributed over the whole country in the way best adapted to its own development, and to the maintenance and development of the other elements of production.
      Accordingly, abolition of the antithesis between town and country is not merely possible. It has become a direct necessity of industrial production itself, just as it has become a necessity of agricultural production and, besides, of public health. The present poisoning of the air, water and land can be put an end to only by the fusion of town and country; and only such fusion will change the situation of the masses now languishing in the towns, and enable their excrement to be used for the production of plants instead of for the production of disease.
      Capitalist industry has already made itself relatively independent of the local limitations arising from the location of sources of the raw materials it needs. The textile industry works up, in the main, imported raw materials. Spanish iron ore is worked up in England and Germany and Spanish and South-American copper ores, in England. Every coalfield now supplies fuel to an industrial area far beyond its own borders, an area which is widening every year. Along the whole of the European coast steam-engines are driven by English and to some extent also by German and Belgian coal. Society liberated from the restrictions of capitalist production can go much further still. By generating a race of producers with an all-round development who understand the scientific basis of industrial production as a whole, and each of whom has had practical experience in a whole series of branches of production from start to finish, this society will bring into being a new productive force which will abundantly compensate for the labour required to transport raw materials and fuel from great distances.
      The abolition of the separation of town and country is therefore not utopian, also, in so far as it is conditioned on the most equal distribution possible of modern industry over the whole country. It is true that in the huge towns civilisation has bequeathed us a heritage which it will take much time and trouble to get rid of. But it must and will be got rid of, however, protracted a process it may be. Whatever destiny may be in store for the German Empire of the Prussian nation, [119] Bismarck can go to his grave proudly aware that the desire of his heart is sure to be fulfilled: the great towns will perish.
      And now see how puerile is Herr Dühring’s idea that society can take possession of all means of production in the aggregate without revolutionising from top to bottom the old method of production and first of all putting an end to the old division of labour; that everything will be in order once “natural opportunities and personal capabilities are taken into account” {D. C. 259} — that therefore whole masses of entities will remain, as in the past, subjected to the production of one single article; whole “populations” {275} will be engaged in a single branch of production, and humanity continue to be divided, as in the past, into a number of different crippled “economic species” {329}, for there still are “porters” and “architects” {D. K.G. 500}. Society is to become master of the means of production as a whole, in order that each individual may remain the slave of his means of production, and have only a choice as to which means of production are to enslave him. And see also how Herr Dühring considers the separation of town and country as “inevitable in the nature of things” {D. C. 232}, and can find only a tiny palliative in schnaps-distilling and beet-sugar manufacturing — two, in their connection specifically Prussian, branches of industry; how he makes the distribution of industry over the country dependent on certain future inventions and on the necessity of associating industry directly with the procurement of raw materials — raw materials which are already used at an ever increasing distance from their place of origin! And Herr Dühring finally tries to cover up his rear by assuring us that in the long run social wants will carry through the union between agriculture and industry even against economic considerations, as if this would be some economic sacrifice! Certainly, to be able to see that the revolutionary elements which will do away with the old division of labour, along with the separation of town and country, and will revolutionise the whole of production; see that these elements are already contained in embryo in the production conditions of modern large-scale industry and that their development is hindered by the existing capitalist mode of production — to be able to see these things, it is necessary to have a somewhat wider horizon than the sphere of jurisdiction of Prussian law, than the country where production of schnaps and beet-sugar are the key industries, and where commercial crises can be studied on the book market. To be able to see these things it is necessary to have some knowledge of real large-scale industry in its historical growth and in its present actual form, especially in the one country where it has its home and where alone it has attained its classical development. Then no one will think of attempting to vulgarise modern scientific socialism and to degrade it into Herr Dühring’s specifically Prussian socialism."
    2. ↑ Anti-Dühring (1877), Part III: Socialism: "The abolition of the antithesis between town and country was demanded by Fourier, as by Owen, as the first basic prerequisite for the abolition of the old division of labour altogether. Both of them thought that the population should be scattered through the country in groups of sixteen hundred to three thousand persons; each group was to occupy a gigantic palace, with a household run on communal lines, in the centre of their area of land. It is true that Fourier occasionally refers to towns, but these were to consist in turn of only four or five such palaces situated near each other. Both writers would have each member of society occupied in agriculture as well as in industry; with Fourier, industry covers chiefly handicrafts and manufacture, while Owen assigns the main role to modern industry and already demands the introduction of steam-power and machinery in domestic work. But within agriculture as well as industry both of them also demand the greatest possible variety of occupation for each individual, and in accordance with this, the training of the youth for the utmost possible all-round technical functions. They both consider that man should gain universal development through universal practical activity and that labour should recover the attractiveness of which the division of labour has despoiled it, in the first place through this variation of occupation, and through the correspondingly short duration of the “sitting” — to use Fourier’s expression — devoted to each particular kind of work. Both Fourier and Owen are far in advance of the mode of thought of the exploiting classes inherited by Herr Dühring, according to which the antithesis between town and country is inevitable in the nature of things; the narrow view that a number of “entities” {D. C. 257} must in any event be condemned to the production of one single article, the view that desires to perpetuate the “economic species” {329} of men distinguished by their way of life — people who take pleasure in the performance of precisely this and no other thing, who have therefore sunk so low that they rejoice in their own subjection and one-sidedness. In comparison with the basic conceptions even of the “idiot” {D. K. G. 286} Fourier’s most recklessly bold fantasies; in comparison even with the paltriest ideas of the “crude, feeble, and paltry” {295, 296} Owen — Herr Dühring, himself still completely dominated by the division of labour, is no more than an impertinent dwarf."
    3. ↑ The Communist Manifesto (1848), Section II: Proletarians and Communists: "Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country."
    4. ↑ V. I. Lenin: Marxist Views on the Agrarian Question in Europe and in Russia: There is an absolute decline in the agricultural population, but agricultural production is making progress. In the nineteenth century this progress was closely connected with the growth of commodity agriculture. It brings out one of the main features of the capitalist system today, which is expressed in the development of competition in agriculture, in the creation of a market for it, and in the differentiation of the population. This progress has given a strong stimulus to the development of agriculture, but every step in this progress has been attended by a rise of contradictions which make it impossible to use all the productive forces of the new, scientific agriculture. Capitalism creates large-scale production and competition, which are attended by rapacious use of the productive forces of the soil. Concentration of the population in the cities creates depopulated territories and an abnormal metabolism. Cultivation of the land is not improved, or not improved as it should be.
      Socialist critics directed attention to this fact a long time ago (Marx). Mr. Hertz, and, later, Messrs. Bulgakov, Chernov, and Struve here in Russia maintained that the theory of Marx, who relied upon Liebig, had become antiquated. This opinion of the “critics” is quite fallacious. There is no doubt that capitalism has upset the equilibrium between the exploitation of the land and fertilisation of the land (the role of the separation of the town from the countryside). With many writers who sympathise with the “criticism” of the Marxist theory rather than with this theory itself, their own data speak against them. An example is Nossig. According to his data, it would appear that the productive forces of the soil are not replenished, that the land does not get back what is taken from it. Both manure and artificial fertilisers are required. One-third of an average of 60,000 kilograms of fertilisers used per hectare of land should be made up of manure, but that cannot be provided under the existing system of agriculture.

    Gallery

    Navigation

    Retrieved from "https://polcompball.wiki/Technogaianism?oldid=599194"
    Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.
    More information

    Recent changes

  • Kakistocracy
    Gamingskeleton48 • 3 minutes ago
  • Kakistocracy
    Gamingskeleton48 • 3 minutes ago
  • Kakistocracy
    Gamingskeleton48 • 4 minutes ago
  • Neo-Libertarianism
    Gamingskeleton48 • 17 minutes ago
    • Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.
    More information