Nanotechnology and pollution

[Ahmed]

It is true if the "clash" takes the classic form of a war, but not if, as I believe it, that of a civilizational collapse, which, far from stimulating the technique would eradicate it durably.

It seems pretty plausible to me, considering that this is the ongoing destruction of the metabolic possibilities of capital, via the ever greater suppression of living labor which underlies this march towards collapse; predictable failure comes from the success of the approach ...

Of course, however difficult to imagine, there is nothing to rule out the possibility that a new form of hyper-technological domination will arise and impose itself (which I obviously don't want!).
This systemic leap remains however to be conceptualized ... and should not make us forget that there are other, more smiling possibilities.

[Janic]

ahmed hello

and should not make us forget that there are other more smiling possibilities.

as?

[Ahmed]

The futures that will result from systemic evolution will necessarily be unfortunate; for it not to be so, that supposes a going beyond, a voluntary "outside" of the system which breaks with its determinism *.
This can only be envisaged by a will coming from the base of society, a will which would tend to refuse current irrational goals in order to move in a concerted manner towards satisfying the real needs of all. Get out of economism, from the categories that support the system that is collapsing: work (in the precise sense that it takes in this context), value, goods and money.
This is the only way to configure more "smiling" futures (I'm not talking about the bright future here!).

Naturally, no substitute system guarantees this, quite the contrary, every system tends towards its own satisfaction and its limit and, in this sense, any utopia is a dystopia ...

Experiences exist, modest but real, as in Chiapas and Greece: I have already mentioned them.

* This is what invites us F. Roddier.

[Janic]

ahmed hello

Naturally, no substitute system guarantees this, quite the contrary, every system tends towards its own satisfaction and its limit and, in this sense, any utopia is a dystopia ...

it is still a question of time available for a possible change which is far from being unanimous.

[Ahmed]

Of course, Janic, this is what explains the very lively reactions of the media watchdogs, as soon as words are formulated aiming at autonomy and thus calling into question the official doxa * ...

* Doxa: the way; orthodoxy: the straight way (in fact, the accepted, recognized way); heterodoxy: the different way.