I guess, but things like community gardens get people together, to communicate, share ideas and help each other out. Modern capitalism attempts to eradicate community and keep the individual alone, stuck inside, easily manageable and placated with tailored content online.
Building community seems like an important bit of defiance, even if it doesn’t ‘scale up to industrial levels’. It depends what your goal is here, and I don’t think the ‘goal’ of community gardens was every to feed an entire society.
poVoq@slrpnk.net 6 hours ago
This kind of labour intensive farming is actually orders of magnitude more efficient (on an acres of land farmed basis) that mechanized industrialized farming.
But you are not entirely wrong that “community gardening” is insufficient, but good luck convincing anyone to engage in serious civil disobedience etc. when there is no alternative support network that can feed them while doing so.
mildseason@sopuli.xyz 4 hours ago
I can believe that but I think the more important metric is labour hours vs food produced. Less labour and more food means more time for other activities.
A support network for civil disobedience can never exist. The state would shut it down immediatly. And yet disobedience must occur if the system is to truly change.
This is where we find ourselves. Destroy flock cameras. Don’t get caught. Support Palestine Action. Don’t get caught. Use what little time is available to fight back. But most importantly, don’t get caught because no one else can afford to save you.
poVoq@slrpnk.net 3 hours ago
There are always people that have time to invest in low risk activities but can’t invest them in high risk ones, usually because of dependents they need to take care off.
Civil disobedience literally can’t exist without a support network and there are plenty of examples where it has existed with the state doing little to nothing to prevent that. There are always ways to fly under the radar for such support networks.
Destroying flock cameras is not a bad idea, but it is largely inconsequential. Style over substance so to say.