industrialism   41

How ultra-processed food took over your shopping basket | Food | The Guardian
The long read: It’s cheap, attractive and convenient, and we eat it every day – it’s difficult not to. But is ultra-processed food making us ill and driving the global obesity crisis?
food  processed.food  diet  health  eating  industrialism  business  food.preservation  economics  environment 
7 weeks ago by po
It's Impossible To Eat Healthfully. Here's Why. | HuffPost
Food has been identified as a major cause of health problems in the U.S., with poor diet to blame for nearly half of all deaths due to heart disease, stroke and diabetes. Yet, even if we improve diet, we are still exposed to the damaging health impacts of what the report from the Ellen MacArthur Foundation calls the “industrial” way that food is produced. By 2050, warns the report, around 5 million people a year could die.
industriality  industrialism  Food 
january 2019 by bdwc
ROAR Magazine: The Long Shadow of May ’68
After 2011, it became clear that in today’s globalized and financialized world, class struggle is alive and well—even if its forms have changed in a number of important ways as a result of the transformations of capitalism and work over the past four decades. Contemporary class struggles still fundamentally revolve against the opposition between those who own capital and those who have to sell their labor power in order to survive, but they no longer take place exclusively at the point of production (they arguably never did, but this was nevertheless long the privileged site of struggle for the dominant Marxist and anarcho-syndicalist traditions). Today’s struggles also crucially unfold in the relationship between debtors and creditors; between tenants and landlords; between taxpayers and state financiers. The field of action, in short, has become significantly greater and much more complex to navigate.
May1968  students  strikes  DeGaulle  industrialism  post-industrialism  socialMovements  Thatcherism  MitterrandFrancois  identityPolitics  technocracy  technology  financialisation  Blairism  ThirdWay  9/11  warOnTerror  crisis  LehmanBrothers  austerity  ArabSpring  class  politics  dctagged  dc:creator=RoosJerome 
june 2018 by petej
The best diet for good health? Nestlé (NSRGY) chairman Peter Brabeck-Letmathe makes the case for going beyond natural foods — Quartz
>> “It really is about do you think shitty food boosted by nutrients is better for you than real food,” says Mark Bittman, author and former food columnist for The New York Times. “There’s not going to be proof on one side or the other, but you can say follow the money. He’s a businessman.”

Points to Purdy for getting a Bittman quote.
food  corporatism  business  industrialism  nature  health  corruption  greed 
february 2018 by po
Sounds | Work With Sounds
WWS is recording the endangered or disappearing sounds of industrial society – including sounds people try/tried to protect themselves from. During 1st September 2013 and 31st September 2015 we will record at least 600 sounds in their original settings. Every sound will also be documented: What and where is it? And how did we record it?

WWS will be creating a soundscape of industrial Europe.
sound_design  labor  industrialism  sound_history 
november 2017 by shannon_mattern
Tyler Reinhard on Twitter: "how come no one is saying that school itself is a bad idea?"
"how come no one is saying that school itself is a bad idea?

learning — obviously — is something that occurs throughout life and intersects with creative and communal activity and cannot be confined.

there is no reason schools should resemble factories or prisons (as they do now) or startups. schools must instead be community centers.

most importantly, schools cannot be standardized to move with the labor markets. it’s impossible and foolish and destroys entire generations

when maria montessori drafted a model for a fusion of the scientific method and pedagogy she was optimizing for agrarian industrialism

we’ve barely improved on her ideas, and have yet to embrace her approach: build a community that extended thought beyond the industrial era.

we’ve moved beyond the industrial era, and our communities have too. we need communities that extend thought beyond the digital age

learning (like labor) will no longer be constrained by geography. accordingly, schools are a liability for both learners and teachers.

not to say we shouldn’t build social spaces for learning — we should! but those spaces need to be products of communities, not economies.

i dropped out of high school. best decision i ever made. i’ve spoken at length about how important teachers were both in and out of class.

instead of worrying about the state education leadership, we should be worried about whether our kids will even have communities to learn in

i outlined my opposition to schools over a year ago and @rogre collected my thoughts here: https://storify.com/rogre/the-lessons-between-the-lessons [Also collected here: https://pinboard.in/u:robertogreco/b:802b607fc713 ]"
tylerreinhard  education  schools  unschooling  community  communitycenters  learning  howwelearn  geography  marimontessori  montessori  pedagogy  standardization  labor  industrialism 
february 2017 by robertogreco
Clockwork: Taylorism and its Continuing Influence on Work and Schooling | E. Wayne Ross - Academia.edu
Now one of the very frst requirements for a man who is fit to handle pig iron as a regular occupation is that he shall be so stupid and so phlegmatic that he more nearly resembles in his mental make-up the ox than any other type. The man who is mentally alert and intelligent is for this very reason entirely unsuited to what would, or him, be the grinding monotony o work o this character. Tereore the workman who is best suited to handling pig iron is un-able to understand the real science o doing this class o work. (aylor, 1911/1997, p. 59)
taylorism  workworld  labor  20thc  industrialism  capitalism 
may 2015 by rachaelsullivan
Forget Shorter Showers: Why Personal Change Does Not Equal Political Change
"Would any sane PERSON think dumpster diving would have stopped Hitler, or that composting would have ended slavery or brought about the eight-hour workday, or that chopping wood and carrying water would have gotten people out of Tsarist prisons, or that dancing naked around a fire would have helped put in place the Voting Rights Act of 1957 or the Civil Rights Act of 1964? Then why now, with all the world at stake, do so many people retreat into these entirely personal “solutions”?

Part of the problem is that we’ve been victims of a campaign of systematic misdirection. Consumer culture and the capitalist mindset have taught us to substitute acts of personal consumption (or enlightenment) for organized political resistance. An Inconvenient Truth helped raise consciousness about global warming. But did you notice that all of the solutions presented had to do with personal consumption — changing light bulbs, inflating tires, driving half as much — and had nothing to do with shifting power away from corporations, or stopping the growth economy that is destroying the planet? Even if every person in the United States did everything the movie suggested, U.S. carbon emissions would fall by only 22 percent. Scientific consensus is that emissions must be reduced by at least 75 percent worldwide.

Or let’s talk water. We so often hear that the world is running out of water. People are dying from lack of water. Rivers are dewatered from lack of water. Because of this we need to take shorter showers. See the disconnect?Because I take showers, I’m responsible for drawing down aquifers? Well, no. More than 90 percent of the water used by humans is used by agriculture and industry. The remaining 10 percent is split between municipalities and actual living breathing individual humans. Collectively, municipal golf courses use as much water as municipal human beings. People (both human people and fish people) aren’t dying because the world is running out of water. They’re dying because the water is being stolen.

Or let’s talk energy. Kirkpatrick Sale summarized it well: “For the past 15 years the story has been the same every year: individual consumption — residential, by private car, and so on — is never more than about a quarter of all consumption; the vast majority is commercial, industrial, corporate, by agribusiness and government [he forgot military]. So, even if we all took up cycling and wood stoves it would have a negligible impact on energy use, global warming and atmospheric pollution.”

Or let’s talk waste. In 2005, per-capita municipal waste production (basically everything that’s put out at the curb) in the U.S. was about 1,660 pounds. Let’s say you’re a die-hard simple-living activist, and you reduce this to zero. You recycle everything. You bring cloth bags shopping. You fix your toaster. Your toes poke out of old tennis shoes. You’re not done yet, though. Since municipal waste includes not just residential waste, but also waste from government offices and businesses, you march to those offices, waste reduction pamphlets in hand, and convince them to cut down on their waste enough to eliminate your share of it. Uh, I’ve got some bad news. Municipal waste accounts for only 3 percent of total waste production in the United States.

I want to be clear. I’m not saying we shouldn’t live simply. I live reasonably simply myself, but I don’t pretend that not buying much (or not driving much, or not having kids) is a powerful political act, or that it’s deeply revolutionary. It’s not. Personal change doesn’t equal social change.

So how, then, and especially with all the world at stake, have we come to accept these utterly insufficient responses? I think part of it is that we’re in a double bind. A double bind is where you’re given multiple options, but no matter what option you choose, you lose, and withdrawal is not an option. At this point, it should be pretty easy to recognize that every action involving the industrial economy is destructive (and we shouldn’t pretend that solar photovoltaics, for example, exempt us from this: they still require mining and transportation infrastructures at every point in the production processes; the same can be said for every other so-called green technology). So if we choose option one — if we avidly participate in the industrial economy — we may in the short term think we win because we may accumulate wealth, the marker of “success” in this culture. But we lose, because in doing so we give up our empathy, our animal humanity. And we really lose because industrial civilization is killing the planet, which means everyone loses. If we choose the “alternative” option of living more simply, thus causing less harm, but still not stopping the industrial economy from killing the planet, we may in the short term think we win because we get to feel pure, and we didn’t even have to give up all of our empathy (just enough to justify not stopping the horrors), but once again we really lose because industrial civilization is still killing the planet, which means everyone still loses. The third option, acting decisively to stop the industrial economy, is very scary for a number of reasons, including but not restricted to the fact that we’d lose some of the luxuries to which we’ve grown accustomed, and the fact that those in power might try to kill us if we seriously impede their ability to exploit the world — none of which alters the fact that it’s a better option than a dead planet. Any option is a better option than a dead planet.

Besides being ineffective at causing the sorts of changes necessary to stop this culture from killing the planet, there are at least four other problems with perceiving simple living as a political act (as opposed to living simply because that’s what you want to do). The first is that it’s predicated on the flawed notion that humans inevitably harm their landbase. Simple living as a political act consists solely of harm reduction, ignoring the fact that humans can help the Earth as well as harm it. We can rehabilitate streams, we can get rid of noxious invasives, we can remove dams, we can disrupt a political system tilted toward the rich as well as an extractive economic system, we can destroy the industrial economy that is destroying the real, physical world.

The second problem — and this is another big one — is that it incorrectly assigns blame to the individual (and most especially to individuals who are particularly powerless) instead of to those who actually wield power in this system and to the system itself. Kirkpatrick Sale again: “The whole individualist what-you-can-do-to-save-the-earth guilt trip is a myth. We, as individuals, are not creating the crises, and we can’t solve them.”

The third problem is that it accepts capitalism’s redefinition of us from citizens to consumers. By accepting this redefinition, we reduce our potential forms of resistance to consuming and not consuming. Citizens have a much wider range of available resistance tactics, including voting, not voting, running for office, pamphleting, boycotting, organizing, lobbying, protesting, and, when a government becomes destructive of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, we have the right to alter or abolish it.

The fourth problem is that the endpoint of the logic behind simple living as a political act is suicide. If every act within an industrial economy is destructive, and if we want to stop this destruction, and if we are unwilling (or unable) to question (much less destroy) the intellectual, moral, economic, and physical infrastructures that cause every act within an industrial economy to be destructive, then we can easily come to believe that we will cause the least destruction possible if we are dead.

The good news is that there are other options. We can follow the examples of brave activists who lived through the difficult times I mentioned — Nazi Germany, Tsarist Russia, antebellum United States — who did far more than manifest a form of moral purity; they actively opposed the injustices that surrounded them. We can follow the example of those who remembered that the role of an activist is not to navigate systems of oppressive power with as much integrity as possible, but rather to confront and take down those systems."
via:caseygollan  2015  change  politicalchange  personalchange  environment  sustainability  environmentalism  derrickjensen  capitalism  consumerism  globalwarming  climatechange  reistance  inconvenienttruth  water  energy  consumption  kirckpatricksale  waste  simplicity  politics  doublebinds  success  wealth  culture  industrialism  activism  purity  morality  injustice  oppression  power  integrity  systemsthinking  systems  misdirection  2009  policy  organization  civilization  individualism  collectivism 
february 2015 by robertogreco
Art as a weapon: Franz Seiwert and the Cologne progressives - Martyn Everett
"Although they displayed artistic links with the Dutch De Stijl, and with Russian Constructivism and Suprematism, the work of the Progressives differed from these movements in two ways; it was overtly political in its content, and it was almost exclusively representational and so retained an easy intelligibility - important because their art was not produced for the gallery, the art critic or other artists, but for ordinary people. The subject matter of their art, and the form in which it was executed was largely determined by their political beliefs. They also sought to break down the cultural exclusivity of art, by using an artistic language that could be easily understood, and which was widely disseminated in a form suited to the mass society created by capitalism. So they frequently utilised the woodcut or the linocut, which could be readily reproduced in the papers like Die Aktion and Der Ziegelbrenner.

The political constructivists were anxious to de-individualise art, and tended to concentrate in their work on groups and classes, and not on individual characters. Individuals are represented only to emphasise their powerlessness, or their subject position, concepts such as solidarity by grouping people together. (see figs 1 and 2) Figures were schematised to the point where they became completely anonymous - as anonymous and de-individualised as capitalism made them. This transformation of form was just as important as the transformation of content. Seiwert, who was the main theoretician of the Progressives, wanted to create a new art of the working class which would not just come from putting a proletarian prefix to bourgeois styles. Consequently the Progressives were determined to develop a new style which involved a rejection of gallery art:
If one correctly conceives labour as the maintenance of life of the individual and of the whole, then art is nothing other than the visualisation of the organisation of labour and of life. Panel painting, which was created not accidentally, but from an inner necessity coinciding with the rise of modern Capitalism, becomes inconceivable. Anyway, an individual work of art as confirmation of an egocentric type of person on the one hand, and, on the other, in the hands of its owner, as confirmation of his title as possessor, will no longer be possible. (Seiwert A bis Z 1932)



His surviving linocuts depict the dehumanised nature of the industrial system, with a physical environment that dominates the individual, rendering the worker an extension of the machine (see fig. 7)

Like the other Progessives Schmitz undertook solidarity work with the Communist International Workers Aid Committee, but as a rule the Progressives kept apart from the Communist Party, and the ASSO, the communist dominated Association of Revolutionary Artists. Seiwert explained the differences between them:
Just because its contents have a tendency to be 'proletarian', making statements about the struggle, solidarity, and class consciousness of the proletariat, bourgeois art has not by any means as yet become proletarian art. Form must be made subservient to content: content must recast form to become content. The work where this happens is created out of the collective consciousness where the self which creates a work is no longer bourgeois individualistic isolation, but a tool of the collective consciousness ... To maintain that when the content of a bourgeois art form makes a statement about proletarian problems this was proletarian art, seems to me a wholly Social-Democratic attitude, and in this context 'Social Democrats' includes those who are members of the Communist Party.

Seiwert then extends this critique into a more general attack on Communist methods:
It is exactly the same attitude which believes that the means of production, in the Capitalist sense, can be redirected from the control of those above to those below in a more far-reaching way than by the regulation of the means of production in a Communist society; the same attitude which believes in taking bourgeois technology from bourgeois industry and using it, in the hope that science developed in the service of the bourgeoisie can contain pure, independent, objective truth and, taken out of the hands of the bourgeoisie, can become science for the proletariat. Yes - science for the proletariat, so that it can remain the proletariat, but no means by which the proletariat can rise up and free itself.

A Communist society, and with it Communist culture, cannot be created by taking over the positions of Capitalist society and of bourgeois culture. Proletarian art exists when its form is the expression of the organisation of the feeling of solidarity, and of the class consciousness of the masses . . .

This statement, in spite of the terminology, encapsulates the anarchist rejection of authoritarian communist attempts to seize and use the state to direct a revolution, and reformulates it in terms of science, technology and culture.

In order to attack capitalist industrialism more effectively Seiwert resorted to a highly stylised representation, and the development of a simple pictorial language, which dialectically conceived, symbolised the opposing forces of capitalism and communism. A chimney, transmission belts, furnace, factory chimney and so on, stood for the inhuman aspects of industrialisation, whilst the sun, stars and trees have a positive value, pointing towards a better, socialist future. They can also have a negative significance, a crossed-out sun would strengthen the evil impression of the industrial scene. People are frequently depicted as being shaped or controlled by the system, and in many of Seiwert's linocuts a person's head is linked to the factory transmission belts to indicate that under capitalism the worker is only a part of the production process. (fig. 8)"
art  war  franzseiwert  via:unthinkingly  labor  capitalism  communism  history  germany  industrialism  dehumanization  work  culture  society 
may 2014 by robertogreco
Problems of Engineering and Problems of Life | The American Conservative
"I have suggested that the cultural health of Europe, including the cultural health of its component parts, is incompatible with extreme forms of both nationalism and internationalism. But the cause of that disease, which destroys the very soil in which culture has its roots, is not so much extreme ideas, and the fanaticism which they stimulate, as the relentless pressure of modern industrialism, setting the problems which the extreme ideas attempt to solve. Not least of the effects of industrialism is that we become mechanized in mind, and consequently attempt to provide solutions in terms of engineering, for problems which are essentially problems of life." — T.S. Eliot
life  responsibility  criticalthing  industrialism  alanjacobs  2013  1944  culture  problemsolving  technosolutionism 
july 2013 by robertogreco

related tags

1920s  1930s  1944  1960s  1990s  19th.century  2009  2013  2015  20th.century  20thc  9/11  activism  alanjacobs  apple  arabspring  archaeology  architecture  art.historians  art  austerity  biography  blairism  blog  book_reviews  books:noted  books:owned  bradford  british  brutalism  buildings  business-culture  business  capitalism  careerism  careers  change  child  china  chinese  civilization  class  climatechange  cms  coal  collectivism  collectors  commercialism  communication  communism  community  communitycenters  consumerism  consumption  cool  corporatism  corruption  council.housing  crisis  criticalthing  criticism  critique  crossdisciplinary  cultural-norms  culture  dc  dc:creator=roosjerome  dctagged  degaulle  dehumanization  delicious-export  derrickjensen  detroit  develop  diego_rivera  diet  disciplines  division_of_labor  docsearls  documentation  doublebinds  eating  economics  education  energy  engineering  england  english.heritage  entartete.kunst  environment  environmentalism  essay  fabrication  factories  factory  failure  financialisation  folkwang  food.preservation  food  franzseiwert  galleries  geography  germany  gildedage  globalwarming  government  graphics  greed  health  heritage  highered  hist2520  historiography  history  housing  how_stuff_works  howwelearn  identitypolitics  illustration  images  inconvenienttruth  individualism  industrial  industrialisation  industrialists  industriality  industrialization  industry  infrastructure  injustice  innovation  integrity  interdisciplinary  internet  investigate  iphone  isolationism  japan  karl.ernst.osthaus  kirckpatricksale  labor  learning  lehmanbrothers  life  listed.buildings  lms  local  localism  london  machinery  management  marimontessori  marx  marxism  may1968  mechanism  media  medication  mine  misdirection  mitterrandfrancois  modern  modernism  montessori  morality  multidisciplinary  museums  nature  network  oil  onlinelearning  opensource  oppression  organization  organizations  orientalism  packagin  park.hill  patronage  pay  pedagogy  pennsylvania  people  personalchange  philanthropy  photography  photos  pittsburgh  policy  politicalchange  politics  post-industrialism  postindustrialism  power  preservation  private  problemsolving  processed.food  productivity  professionalism  property  psychology  psychotropic  public  purity  redevelopment  reference  reistance  research  responsibility  saltaire  schools  science-mystery  sheffield  simplicity  social.housing  social_life_of_the_mind  socialmovements  societies  society  sound_design  sound_history  spatial.practice  spatiality  spreadthis  standardization  steel  steve.parnell  strikes  students  study  success  sustainability  systems  systemsthinking  taylorism  technocracy  technology  technosolutionism  textiles  thatcherism  the.socialist.republic.of.south.yorkshire  theory  thirdway  titus  to-watch  tour  tourism  trains  tube  tylerreinhard  uk  unschooling  urban.splash  urban  urbanism  usa  varnelis  vintage  war  waronterror  waste  water  wealth  wendellberry  west.yorkshire  wiki  wikipedia  wool  work  workworld  writing  writingprocess  yorkshire 

Copy this bookmark:



description:


tags: