The necessary socialist International

[Last edited on Monday, 6 October 2025]

Like Pëtr Kropotkin, Errico Malatesta, Emma Goldman and so many other anarchists, i think we need to take the means of production and the cultivated lands, in order to finally end it with this domination of exploitation, violence and death that patriarcapitalism is, and to save ourselves, our children and the future generations, because in addition to the usual exploitation and violence there’s the huge ecological problem, one of the most problematic elements of which is the average temperature of the world rising, while greenhouse gas emissions continue to increase, mainly driven by energy production and consumption for which current “green technologies” are just greenwashing, and despite the many decades of peaceful pressures on governments and companies that we acted in every sauce from below, obtaining nothing at all; and climate change is only one of the six of nine planetary boundaries we are far beyond.

A “forced-by-nature-degrowth” would happen when it would be too late for our species and so many others to not extinguish and, at the same time, “degrowth-by-our-will” is impossible as well: it’s impossible that the people in the US, in Europe, in China, in Russia, in all these “developed” countries, and particularly the upper classes, who are by far the greatest GHG emitters, will “degrow” in numbers high enough and in times short enough to get our species out of the very sorrowful extinction by famine, thirst, warfare and pandemics that we are already living today in many territories. This is why i think there’s no alternative to taking the lands, to cultivate them without polluting, to take and close the industrial “meat factories”, to take the means of production and turn off all the polluting ones.

Agricolture today produces the second most important part of greenhouse gases, but it is possible to cultivate without resorting to fossil fuels burning, that today is mostly used to produce synthetic nitrogen, by practicing agroforestry and permaculture, that are more productive than industrial agricolture and don’t pollute, and we could also help ourselves with the most advanced fungal solutions, so it would be possible to start anew everywhere, on the model of Kurdish democratic confederalism and Murray Bookchin’s libertarian municipalism, as a world of small communities, that in the cities would be municipalities, and in smaller towns the town itself, where decisions would be taken and current rules would be abrogated or redefined and refined in assemblies that would be open to all and where everyone would have the same decisional power, with the municipalities commercially relating with each other by public assemblies as well – because it should be clear by now, also due to the historical experiences of “real communisms,” with their marxist nonsense of the “dictatorship of the proletariat,” which produced some of the worst nefariousness in history, that social justice and good levels of social equality require to be backed by the constant possibility of open and public verbal confrontation about what to do with common goods and common spaces, and about which rules to give ourselves.

This kind of social organization has precedents in history, and today it would be easier to achieve, in a social context where love would finally be free from sexual paranoia such as misogyny, homophobia and transphobia, which originated from the superstitious approach to our somewhat innate competitiveness and the aggressiveness that stems from it, with free and global access for all to lay, egalitarian education and knowledge of horrors of the past, with the abolition of licenses and patents, and with the possibility for all to sublimate our competitiveness and lash out the aggressiveness that stems from it in the many harmless or mostly harmless ways that this can be done, for example through frugal sports, old and new arts, including immersive video games, and so on.

Yet time is crucial, and it’s running out not least with respect to the risk of extinction by ecological issues (climate change, loss of biodiversity, ocean acidification and so on), but especially with respect to the increasing probability that this umpteenth crisis of capitalism will end up again in an unfolded third world war, that would be an acceleration towards the extinction of our species and so many others, through the spread of worse and worse nationalisms and the already ongoing wars, that are still mainly driven by nationalist conflicting wills to hoard raw materials that we should hugely reduce our use of, such as fossil fuels and so many others.

This crisis of capitalism that we are living today is not only the umpteenth of a series of crises that have been increasingly damaging, but it’s also unprecedented, with its enormous ecological implications that are now, already tragic, with the amount of death and pain they have already caused and are causing now in the world, that would just get more and more tragic and painful for everyone with the worsening of the already and since long ongoing crisis in the ability of the living to reproduce even in order to feed us, and with the worsening of water scarcity and drought that is already ongoing, and with so many other problems that patriarcapitalism has caused and is causing and that would certainly form a whole which, as if one or a few of its parts wasn’t enough, would be fatal for our species and so many others – unless we actually organize and do the socialist International we need to do, quickly, to transform what otherwise would certainly be a bitter and painful end for most or all of us into the foundation and the beginning of a new and much more peaceful, just and happy world for all to live in. Because that which is holy and sacred is not much our individual lives, but life itself, that just can’t be stopped, and in order to be an healthy, and lasting, and maybe even everlasting part of it, and in order to most peacefully live our individual lives in it, we still have to understand that it is the only “god”, and we still have the most of an infinity to learn from it. :-)

Finally: although it would still require being armed, if we managed to be many enough to take the means of production and the cultivated lands in our rich countries and everywhere, maybe not even a single drop of blood, neither ours nor of our adversaries and enemies, would be shed.

The problem with libertarian and egalitarian education at the present time

The problem with libertarian and egalitarian education, at the present time, is that the more we adopt an education in which rules are established with children, as they begin to understand the language, and always remain open to being improved and modified, which is necessary and foundational for a wider education to sharing, the more likely it is that children, once they become adults, will have difficulty adjusting to this ultra-hierarchical present, in which social justice is only a verbal expression with such a small correspondence to reality, and that is currently decimating and would possibly extinguish our species and so many others.

But i think it would be worth it all the same, if we made children aware early enough that, at the present time, the adult world is mostly like that; and, above all, if we organized ourselves, for this and so many other reasons, for the necessary anarcho-communist International.

The Christ: Jesus’ twin

I think it’s probable that “the Christ” was the unknown twin brother of Jesus (let’s call him Diego), and that he was kept imprisoned in Mary’s and Joseph’s poor home basement since not long after Diego and his brother Jesus were born, as per a previously stipulated contract between “the Magi”, which were actually some guys working for the early and then unknown Catholic Church, and Mary and Joseph themselves, until they pulled him out all of a sudden to let the romans put him on the cross and kill him instead of Jesus, to stage Jesus’ death, and then his resurrection.

Before that, Jesus, who was educated mostly by “the Magi”, and agreed to their contract and their plan very early in his life, was mainly reciting “in sunlight”, with the oppressed, a plot and precepts which were written by “the Magi” to persuade them to abandon or never engage in class struggle, to always turn the other cheek.

After Diego died as just one more poor christ on the cross in stead of Jesus, thus increasing in the eyes of the oppressed Jesus’ credibility as a major threat to the powers that were, Jesus acted for them that last touching “bye, see you at the end of the world” scene that “the Magi” had written for him, and then he, Mary and Joseph got the big money that “the Magi” promised to them, and a permanent vacation far away from those territories, in exchange for their good services to the early Catholic Church.

“The dawn of everything”, the “always turn the other cheek” Christian commandment, the Anarchic International and immersive fiction

In their The dawn of everything, David Graeber and David Wengrow prove with archaeological evidence that, in a relatively distant past, there were big cities where people already knew and practiced agriculture, and where, in some cases for more than one millennium, decisions and rules about the commons were taken in open assemblies; thus, they also had good levels of equality in distribution of wealth and resources.

At some point in the book they ask themselves, and obviously their readers too, why, at least now, there is no archaeological evidence of later examples of such big societies which worked that way, and they make an hypothesis: that when three issues or “traits” of centralized accumulation of power and wealth and resources, which i won’t summarize here (read the book! 🙂), intertwine in a given society (like our present societies, since very long time), it’s very difficult to get back, or forward, to equality in distribution of power, work, wealth and resources.

They also emphasize that it is an hypothesis, and that more studies should be done to prove it more, or modify it, or extend it.

Anyway, i have an hypothesis about something that has probably worsened the situation: the Christian commandment to “always turn the other cheek” when anyone treats you bad: although i guess nobody can sincerely tell to really always behave like that, i think it’s a commandment which worked and still works a lot as a moral condemnation of some of the most effective actions any oppressed people can implement against their oppressors, and as a self-justification of fear of implementing it or, sometimes, even of thinking about it.

This bugs me a lot, also because i think that today it would be much easier to build equal societies, after an Anarchic International like this, i.e. after taking the lands to cultivate them without polluting, and the industrial facilities to shut down the polluting ones and build the sustainable alternatives while consuming less and better, which would also save our species and many others from the already ongoing decimation and the otherwise very probable future extinction caused by the current ecological catastrophe and-or the equally severe risks of the ongoing and future wars that the ecological catastrophe itself is very intertwined with: after an Anarchic International like this, in the liberated context it could foster (i.e. a global context of many federated little-to-medium sized communities where decisions and rules about the commons would be defined and refined in open assemblies, and thus we would have very good levels of equality in distribution of work, wealth and resources too, and where two or more communities would settle about exchanges of resources and products with inter-communal assemblies which could be made through the internet), tomorrow we would also have a hugely wider possibility to access and share all knowledge, and to build fictional worlds, with or without fictional stories, using open hardware and software produced by the communities, and to virtually live some time there, and to play and fight and love and build there, with or without other avatars of others’ selves, thus sublimating our dark sides in creativity and lashing them out in almost or totally harmless ways to an extent and with an immersivity that we, as a whole, never had before.

This is what arts have always been about, and tomorrow it would be just freely accessible for all.

Reasons why Meta joining the Fediverse is very bad, how to mitigate the damage, and an idea to save the Fediverse as a new and safer web space

[Last edited on Tuesday, 16 January 2024]

Although i’m sure it won’t avoid most of the damage, i strongly support the Anti-Meta Fedi Pact, and urge Fediverse admins to block Meta’s Threads (currently, the threads.net domain) at their Fediverse instances’ level, because Meta, the producer of Facebook, Whatsapp, Instagram and Threads, is known to do such things as:

  1. profiling users for targeting advertisements [e.g.: 1, 2];
  2. controlling their users emotions;
  3. spreading misinformation and conspiracy theories about November 2020 presidential election in USA;
  4. censoring political organizations – mostly, and by far, of the global left [1, 2], while not censoring political organizations of the most far right (e.g.: italian neofascist organizations like Casapound, Forza Nuova, Lealtà e Azione all have many pages and profiles on Facebook);
  5. facilitating a genocide;
  6. super-exploiting moderators;
  7. censoring wildfires news stories from Canada to Canadian users;
  8. systemically censoring Palestine contents on Instagram and Facebook;
  9. and so much more;

But most Fediverse platforms’ instances, especially most or all of the most populated, are not blocking and won’t block threads.net; thus, using those instances, will be less and less different than using Meta’s products, in terms of data scraping by Meta and users’ privacy, because those instances expose their users to the risk of giving complete access to their “private” messages (messages addressed to “Mentioned people only”, on Mastodon) just by unknowingly or thoughtlessly mentioning Threads accounts in such messages, and to complete access by Meta to their “less public” posts (posts addressed to “Followers only”, on Mastodon), when Threads users will get the possibility to follow other Fediverse platforms accounts, that is soon going to be implemented by Threads developers. Meta has scraped even “less public” posts and “private” messages on its platforms in the past, and it is most probably still doing it, in spite of some court cases that accounted it guilty of doing it and “punished” it, much later than when each one of those abuses was made, with financial penalties that were ludicrous to Meta, because of its huge financial wealth.

To mitigate these risks, users of Fediverse platforms instances that have not blocked the threads.net domain at instance level can still block it by themselves and for themselves only (on Mastodon’s official web frontend, this can be done by clicking on the three dots icon in the lower right corner of any post and choosing Block domain from the popup menu); or they can set their accounts to prompt for their confirmation whenever another account tries to follow theirs (on Mastodon’s official web frontend, this can be done by going to Preferences > Public profile > Privacy and reach tab, and unchecking the Automatically accept new followers checkbox), and then paying attention to not mention any Threads account in their non-public posts (“Followers only” and “Mentioned people only” posts, on Mastodon).

Still, to ensure that the Fediverse won’t become a big barrel from which Meta, and probably other big and medium commercial players in the future, will scrape not only data from public posts, but also from “less public” and “private” posts, the most safe way would be to write a new social networking protocol specification, that could be named FreeSocialProtocol, and to put it under a license or a patent that (1) would prohibit any use of the protocol itself in products that are not open source, and (2) would prohibit its use in products that also use other protocols that are under no licenses, or that are under licenses not prohibiting their use in non-open source products (point 2 would make it a viral license/patent, like the GPL, but only on the open source condition; and necessarily so, because otherwise, this license/patent very purpose would be defeated).

I have no illusion that a new protocol with such a license or patent would be used by many from the start, and maybe it would take long for it to gain traction, or maybe it would never exit the “niche” status, but it would be good all the same even in these cases, and i think there is the possibility that it would gain a lot of traction, soon or later. But, again, i think it would be just and good if it existed even if it was never to exit the “niche” status.

Note 1: i’m trying to verify whether it is possible to create such a license, or such a patent, and to apply it to the specification of a social networking protocol: on Friday, 22 December 2023, i wrote an e-mail to the FSF (using the licensing@fsf.org e-mail address) asking just this; and on Saturday, 6 January 2024, i’ve written to the European section of the FSF too, at its licence-questions@fsfe.org e-mail address, without receiving any answer from both as of today, Tuesday, 16 January 2024.

Note 2: on this topic, you may want to read these ongoing discussions i’m having: the first one with a Fediverse protocols and platform (Streams) developer, the second one with an Akkoma developer (Akkoma is another Fediverse platform, a fork of Pleroma). I think they’re both at least very useful, clarifying and instructive.

Lasciarsi attaccare per poter poi dire “Ha cominciato lui!”

1941: l’Europa è in gran parte in mano all’asse: Germania, Italia, Giappone. Gli USA non sono ancora in guerra. Ci entrano dopo l’attacco dei giapponesi a Pearl Harbor.

Secondo questa “teoria cospirativa” (sezione “Purple” – nel caso la pagina non ti si aprisse su quella direttamente – di questa pagina wikipedia come salvata su wayback machine il 31 maggio 2023), i giapponesi mandano alla propria ambasciata americana un messaggio cifrato diviso in 14 parti, le prime 13 con una cifratura chiamata “Purple” che i servizi USA possono leggere agevolmente dal 1940, l’ultima con un’altra cifratura, ancora molto difficile da decifrare per gli stessi servizi.

Il messaggio viene intercettato dai servizi USA: le prime 13 parti parlano solo di rottura dei rapporti diplomatici con gli USA, la quattordicesima, secondo il colonnello Bretton, pure.

Secondo altr*, che non vengono smentiti dal testo già linkato, Roosevelt lesse le prime 13 parti e disse “È guerra”. E quindi non capisco dove starebbe la cospirazione, in questa versione: Roosevelt sa a quel punto che gli USA saranno attaccati, e non dichiara guerra al Giappone, e non lo attacca, per non essere il primo a farlo: lascia che sia il Giappone ad attaccare (e solo poi dichiarare guerra) probabilmente soprattutto per poter sostenere in seguito che “han cominciato loro”; sacrificando per questo, scientemente,  2403 tra militari e civili.

E io sono convinto che qualcosa di simile sia accaduto tra il governo fascista e teocratico di Israele e i fascisti teocratici di Hamas intorno all’attacco di Hamas del 7 ottobre 2024: che i servizi israeliani non potessero non sapere che Hamas stava preparando il suo attacco, oppure che “ne sapessero poco” (abbastanza poco da poter sostenere, dal canto loro, che non erano segnali importanti, e dal canto del governo israeliano, che proprio non se l’aspettava, l’attacco), per la decisione del governo israeliano di concentrarli su altri “maggiori pericoli” che tra l’altro non sarebbero stati tali, almeno sul breve-medio termine, se il governo israeliano stesso non si fosse costruita così l’ennesima scusa per l’ennesimo macello espansionistico ai danni dei palestinesi, in cui ə militant* di Hamas catturat* o uccis* sono pochissim*, a fronte della decimazione ancora in corso della popolazione; anche perché si sa che Netanyahu, il quale avrebbe potuto impedirlo, ha lasciato per anni che Hamas venisse sostenuta economicamente dal Qatar.

El gato de Schrödinger

De El quark y el jaguar, de Murray Gell-Mann

En el dominio cuasiclásico, los objetos obedecen aproximadamente las leyes de la mecánica clásica. Se encuentran sujetos a fluctuaciones, pero éstas son sucesos individuales superpuestos a un patrón de comportamiento clásico. Sin embargo, una vez se produce una fluctuación en la historia de un objeto por lo demás clásico ésta puede verse arbitrariamente amplificada. Un microscopio puede aumentar la imagen de una partícula de tinta golpeada por una molécula y una fotografía puede preservar la imagen ampliada indefinidamente.

Esto nos trae a la memoria el famoso experimento mental del gato de Schrödinger, en el cual un suceso cuántico es amplificado de manera que decide si un gato resulta envenenado o no. Tal amplificación, aunque poco agradable, es perfectamente posible. Puede diseñarse un mecanismo de forma que la vida del gato dependa, por ejemplo, de la dirección que tome una partícula emitida por la desintegración de un núcleo atómico. (Empleando un arma termonuclear, podría decidirse de igual manera el destino de una ciudad).

La discusión clásica sobre el gato de Schrödinger se basa en la interferencia cuántica entre los escenarios del gato vivo y del gato muerto. Sin embargo, el gato vivo interacciona de modo considerable con el resto del universo —a través de su respiración, por ejemplo— e incluso el gato muerto interactúa hasta cierto punto con el aire. No sirve de nada encerrar al felino en una caja, porque la caja interactúa con el resto del universo, así como con el gato. De modo que hay abundantes oportunidades para la decoherencia entre las historias no detalladas en las que el gato vive y en las que muere. Los escenarios en los que el gato vive y aquellos en los que muere son decoherentes: no hay interferencia entre ellos.

Es tal vez este aspecto de la interferencia en la historia del gato lo que hace exclamar a Stephen Hawking: «Cuando oigo hablar del gato de Schrödinger, echo mano a mi pistola». Esta frase es en cualquier caso una parodia de otra que suele atribuirse a algún líder nazi, pero que de hecho aparece en la obra de teatro Schlageter, de Hanns Johst: «Cuando oigo la palabra Kultur, le quito el seguro a mi Browning».

Supongamos que el suceso cuántico que determina el destino del gato ha ocurrido ya; no sabremos lo que ha pasado hasta que destapemos la caja que encierra al animal. Dado que los dos resultados posibles son decoherentes, la situación no difiere del caso clásico en el que abrimos la caja que contiene a un pobre animal después de un largo viaje, tras el que no sabemos si está vivo o muerto. Se han gastados resmas de papel acerca del supuestamente misterioso estado cuántico del gato, vivo y muerto al mismo tiempo. Ningún objeto cuasiclásico real puede mostrar tal comportamiento, porque su interacción con el resto del universo conducirá a la decoherencia de las posibles alternativas.

Michael Pollan su Timothy Leary

Da Come cambiare la tua mente,
di Michael Pollan (Adelphi, 2019)

«A Harvard stavamo concependo pensieri storicamente estremi» scrisse in seguito Leary a proposito di quel periodo: convinti che «fosse arrivato il momento (dopo i superficiali e nostalgici anni Cinquanta) per visioni rivoluzionarie, sapevamo che l’America aveva esaurito la filosofia, e che era urgentemente necessaria una nuova meta-fisica empirica e tangibile». La bomba e la guerra fredda costituivano lo sfondo essenziale di quelle idee, conferendo al progetto un carattere d’urgenza.

Nel suo passaggio da scienziato a evangelizzatore Leary fu incoraggiato anche da alcuni degli artisti che aveva egli stesso iniziato agli psichedelici. In una memorabile seduta nella sua casa di Newton, nel dicembre del 1960, Leary diede la psilocibina al poeta beat Allen Ginsberg, un uomo che per vestire i panni del profeta visionario non aveva bisogno di alcuna induzione chimica. Verso la fine di un trip estatico, Ginsberg scese incespicando al piano di sotto, si tolse tutti i vestiti e annunciò la propria intenzione di marciare nudo per le strade di Newton predicando il nuovo vangelo.

«Insegneremo alla gente a smettere di odiare» disse, «inizieremo un movimento di pace e amore». Nelle sue parole si può quasi udire la nascita degli anni Sessanta, come un pulcino fluorescente ancora bagnato che rompe il guscio dell’uovo. Quando Leary riuscì a persuadere Allen a non uscire di casa (tra l’altro, era dicembre), il poeta andò al telefono e cominciò a chiamare vari leader mondiali, cercando di farsi passare Kennedy, Chruščëv e Mao Zedong, per cercare di appianare le loro divergenze. Alla fine riuscì a parlare solo con il suo amico Jack Kerouack, presentandosi come Dio («qui è D-I-O che parla») e dicendogli che doveva prendere quei funghi magici.

Al pari di chiunque altro.

Ginsberg era convinto che Leary, il professore di Harvard, fosse l’uomo perfetto per guidare la nuova crociata psichedelica. Per Ginsberg, il fatto che il nuovo profeta «emergesse dall’Università di Harvard», l’alma mater del neoeletto presidente, era un esempio di «commedia storica», giacché qui c’era «il solo e unico Dr. Leary, un essere umano rispettabile, un uomo navigato, messo di fronte al compito d’un Messia». Venendo dal grande poeta, quelle parole caddero come semi sul terreno fertile e ben innaffiato dell’ego di Timothy Leary. (Il fatto che le sostanze psichedeliche possano promuovere un’esperienza di dissoluzione dell’ego, la quale in alcuni individui porta poi rapidamente a una sua colossale espansione, è uno dei loro numerosi paradossi. Essendo stato ammesso a conoscere un grande segreto dell’universo, chi riceve tale conoscenza tende a sentirsi speciale, prescelto per grandi imprese).

[«Essendo stato ammesso a conoscere un grande segreto dell’universo», mah, boh, io al massimo poi così]

Genetica, epigenetica e concezione anarchica del vivente

Da La concezione anarchica del vivente,
di Jean-Jacques Kupiec (elèuthera, 2021),
6.3. L’epigenetica risolve i problemi della genetica

Ai giorni nostri, quando la spiegazione genetica viene colta in fallo, il ricorso all’epigenetica e all’ambiente è diventato un leitmotiv, una sorta di formula magica che si ritiene in grado di risolvere le difficoltà. È incontestabile che l’ambiente e le modificazioni della cromatina dette epigenetiche sono fattori importanti, ma la questione è sapere in che modo influenzano il funzionamento cellulare. Di solito la loro azione è interpretata in un sistema di pensiero informazionale e deterministico. Ci troviamo allora di fronte allo stesso problema presentato dal determinismo genetico. In che modo i fattori epigenetici o quelli ambientali possono esercitare un effetto specifico se gli effettori proteici che dovrebbero veicolarli nelle cellule non lo fanno? Prendiamo un esempio concreto. Il lievito Saccharomyces cerevisiae modifica il proprio comportamento o funzionamento in risposta a segnali ambientali differenti. Si tratta ad esempio della risposta a un feromone sessuale, a un cambiamento di pressione osmotica nell’ambiento o a una crescita filamentosa. Ma in tutti questi casi il lievito usa le stesse proteine non-specifiche. Come può in queste condizioni discriminare tra segnali differenti e ottenere una risposta adeguata? La questione del determinismo ambientale si pone con la stessa gravità riscontrata nel determinismo genetico. Di per sé, invocare l’influenza dell’ambiente non è una soluzione: adesso i determinismi problematici sono due!

La concezione anarchica diverge in maniera netta dall’epigenetica, così come viene abitualmente concepita, perché rinuncia all’idea di un supporto stabile dell’ereditarietà contenuto nei geni, e perché considera l’ontogenesi non come una diversificazione o un’interpretazione dell’informazione genetica, ma come una restrizione del gioco probabilistico del vivente. In questo quadro, l’azione dell’ambiente non è più quella di indurre effetti in maniera deterministica, ma quella di selezionare gli stati cellulari aleatori per la loro stabilizzazione. Perciò la non-specificità delle proteine non è più un problema. Diventa possibile integrare i ruoli delle modificazioni della cromatina: esse non sono un codice epigenetico portatore di informazioni. Sono gli effettori biochimici a consentire la stabilizzazione della cromatina.

Chi​dove​quando​come​cosa​perché

In risposta a questo post fediversico di Gubi: si sono tutte cose belle e giuste e utili e sarebbe bello si diffondessero di più, ma sono anche cose che non si è mai smesso di fare e che non si sono mai diffuse granché, anzi a occhio mi pare siano sempre più minoritarie, forse soprattutto per la repressione sempre più pesante e, per quanto riguarda il tirare in mezzo più gente, secondo me anche o forse soprattutto perché non si definisce in modo almeno vagamente unitario cosa vogliamo fare per risolvere i problemi sempre più enormi in cui stiamo precipitando, e non solo per ammortizzarne gli effetti; ma tra l’altro penso nessuno creda davvero che i sacrosantissimi, meravigliosissimi e sempre sian lodati orti autogestiti, la guerriglia piantamento alberi, filiere corte e mangiare poca carne o niente, occupazioni di case e posti sociali, masse critiche, server sicuri, recupero di hardware vecchio, videogiochi raramente indipendenti, commenti critici più o meno ficcanti e-o efficacemente ironici sui social intorno alle cose sempre più turpi che stanno accadendo, antiproibizionismo non sempre tanto consapevole per non dire poco, e far l’amore ognun* come gli va ma non sempre (porco dio) rispettoso di come davvero va a ognun* — penso nessuno poi creda davvero che tutte queste cose, sacrosante e meravigliose ma a volte anche poco, se anche si diffondessero tanto di più sarebbero una rete in grado di ammortizzare più che poco il dilagare dello spremimento lavorativo a cui sempre più gente è costretta per sopravvivere male, quello del fascismo, quello della miseria materiale – anche quella di chi ancora può tentare di scappare da inferni per ora comunque ben peggiori del nostro -, di quella culturale, e poi soprattutto le siccità e le alluvioni, il clima che ieri era primavera e oggi è autunno inoltrato e in mezzo c’è stato il vento che fa danni sempre più gravi e la grandine coi chicchi da 2 etti che distrugge le coltivazioni, il probabile estendersi della guerra tra russia e ucraina e-o di altri fronti a venire, la relativa crescita della probabilità di ricorso ad armi atomiche, ecc. — figuriamoci fermarli e magari svoltarli.

Chiarito ormai che dall’alto nessun* ha fatto, sta facendo o farà mai cose utili anche solo ad arginare tutto ciò, e che ne sta facendo e continuerà a farne invece di sempre più dannose, cos’altro potremmo fare in pratica per fermare questo disastro, e magari svoltarlo, se non un’Internazionale per tentare di prendere le terre, gli allevamenti, le infrastrutture industriali critiche per spegnere quelle inquinanti e costruire le alternative sostenibili per la produzione energetica e coltivare la terra coi trattori a elettricità pulita e lasciandola riposare invece di usare l’azoto di sintesi che ha un consumo energetico enorme, e chiudere gli allevamenti industriali in cui gli animali, oltre a fare vite d’inferno, consumano quantità immani di acqua e cibarie che vengono da coltivazioni ad azoto di sintesi, ecc., ecc.?

Forse se definissimo meglio di come ho fatto qui come fare queste cose sempre più necessarie anche solo per uno straccio di sopravvivenza, delineando meglio anche come ci organizzeremmo socialmente nell’anarchia distribuita, riusciremmo a tirare in mezzo abbastanza gente per farle davvero.

O forse no.

Boh, però magari avrebbe senso provarci, forse un contesto buono per cominciare a parlarne anche informalmente potrebbe essere questo.