O  M  E       T  O  R  I  E  S       I  N  K  S       O  N  T  A  C  T 

School of destruction

Nature will always rise and doesn't need protection, what laughable discourse. We need protection from nature because it will kick us out if we don't befriend it. The true leaders in our 'democracy', the capital-mighty, flanked by a good influencable chunck of the population, they don't. They're waging war on nature, making us walk in line for it, and we got to stop them, we don't want a quarrel with mother earth. We'll get a smack and might even not be allowed to play along anymore.

  • Salar A. becomes one of the richest men in The Netherlands thanks to messing around with real estate (being responsible for places people live in), the most lucrative thing next to drugs. What does he do with the money? Make his car golden and spray away champagne in the air, not able to taste it. By the way, the real estate is crap to live in.
  • A Russian police corps makes a fortune through corruption? What does the boss do with it? Make his toilet golden.

These are two random anecdotes today in the news. Now think how many people make a fortune of selling out our shared environment, by clear-cutting fairytale moutain slopes, bulldozing sparkling fishgrounds, paving marshes that provided life for thousands of years.. And for what?


(Some kind of) capitalism and industrialisation were brutal for landscapes and cultures, but they also provided societies immensely. Climate disruption and biodiversity loss were inevitable if we wanted to crawl out of poverty and war. But we made it, at least locally and there’s potential globally. It was good now, time for damage control! Time to curb aggravation!

Now there’s enough goods and services to provide for all, even for more, way more, monumentally more. On top of that, productivity of labour rose astronomically since the 1980’s. So, with all our technology and organisation how can smart people be poor? And how can some people... ehm?.. with difficulty connecting causes and effects.. be taught how not to fuck up a consumption process, but not be taught how not to fuck up the very ground under their and their neighbour's feet?

Entangled in the water, steered somewhere by a plastic-faced psycho on a golden jetski

But hmmm… we’re heading down the worst political-economical scenarios leading to the gravest deterioration of the global environment. And inequality rose tremendously. Also, we’re working as much (over)hours as before the astronomical productivity rise, and people aren’t richer now as people were then. But at least something happened: the rich got richer. Woooo! Conspicuous consumption rose with Ferraris and yachts. Yeaahhhhy!

The maintained adagio

Look, if you’re not winning, you’re losing. If you’re not increasing your figures, somebody else is, while they’re gaining accumulation power over capital and control over you, your life, and over everyone's means of survival. The ones most preoccupied with their own numbers are awarded most. Greed is not just the highest virtue, it's become the only, despite communities' challenges. Textbook douche Shkreli multiplied the price of a malaria drug with a factor 56 after buying the license. And guess what, it's perfectly ok for our system. Not ok: bringing to light war crimes, a sadistic US prison camp in Iraq, civilian deaths...


The haves then feel entitled to have more without contributing anything to anyone. Just the having entitles to more. Growth please! Now! There's this dogma that large capital has to grow, which it can on larger scales than ever before via some virtual financial world that dictates the real world. We came to live under the tyranny of numbers, serving the winners. Our society is actually designed to ultimately serve the interests of an elite. Millions of Amazon employees were paid too little, billions of Amazon clients payed too much, so Bezos could accumulate billions of surplus and shoot it up in space in some utterly boring egotrips.


They invented the lie of economic growth, after they invented the lie of economics as an exact science with objective numbers. It’s a behavioural science. Live trees don’t contribute to the GDP, dead trees do. Cigarettes do. Weapons do. Cancer does. All the treatments that follow: more goods, more services, * G R O W T H *. Add to that bullsh*t jobs that make no one better.. society would be better off without, well, the concept has never been so relevant.


Manipulating marketeers look to create needs, artificial scarcity and exclusivity, and explain us the world now… like marketeer Musk (often mistaken for an engineer), thriving on a starting capital stemming from the labour of thousands of South-African mine workers’ efforts, stemming from how his family claimed the diamond profits as if the Musks manually crafted the diamonds themselves into the earth. You don't make a million, you take it, steal it, claim it. Asia's 'richest' person sells water! (Zhong Shanshan) We’re sussed and distracted. That’s the school of destruction we dully sit into:

  • Tyranny of the numbers and the religious pseudo exact science of markets: The small working core of the population is constantly robbed and pillaged by oligarchs, embezzlers and politicians. Sywert van Lienden sold mouthmasks to the government and took a 30% profit for self-enrichment on it, making 30 million euros. These douchebages are heroes in this system while for anyone with common sense they're obviously crooks. Friedrich Engels just had to vomit when he had to destroy rice for his rich dad, just to spice up the prices a bit, nobody got better from that but just one guy who already has more than enough.
  • Greenwashing: They just avoid a mob against them but love to go on making profit their all and everything. If that Cobalt mine in Congo will make 5$ more by stretching a 10 km²'s extra and cause the green subtropical savanna to never recover afterwards, they will want that 5$. Rio Tinto, criticized by the Norwegian government (but spared by all others blinded by short-term self-interest), blasted an archeological site in Australia. Public opinion turned against them. They didn't care, the people wanting their money to become more don't care. There was more critique. Then they were afraid the general wind of critique might effect the confidence for investing in their stock, so they punished their CEO who ordered the destruction: he would get a million dollars off his monster bonus of still thirty-something million dollars, money that one person makes by stealing from the earth.
  • Nowadays everyone calls themselves sustainable. Just because. Even number one investment corporation BlackRock does so, being most obviously solely interested in making money more money in whichever way, be it weapons, big pharma lies,... Moreover enough breakthroughs (Panama papers, Swiss Leaks, Bahamas Leaks, Bahamas Leaks,...) have pointed out the tax evasion constructions to make the capital-mighty their margins higher, and thus contribution to the government and society lower, nothing sustainable about that. Recent FinCEN Files have shown how governments are reluctant to take possible actions because, well, you don't want to make the capital-mighty sad of course. In every leak also a lot of high government officials were implicated themselves, often having privatized unrenewable natural resources and not allowing the smallest percentage going to society (example that tells you the amount of Range Rovers, golden toilets and pools of champagne they scammed the whole of society and the environment for and sold out to China while they could have invested themselves if not all money went to palaces and a car park nobody ever even drives. See how the former European Union’s climate action commissioner from 2014-2019 is actually more concerned with giving his own company subsidies to breed bulls for fighting 'till death, oh, and the profits were of course funneled away somewhere exotic.)
  • The pseudo-liberal neo-liberal: The times that the urges of the elite are the drivers of progress, those are long over, though we are made to believe the elite is still relevant, and that regulation should be minimized to mere accupunctural interventions around cute market failures.
  • Geo-engineering: Global biogeochemical cycles concern endless interdependent complex feedback systems, but still they make us believe it’s a global machine you can turn a screw in, and boom, all is solved. So now we can shut up and work for their grant ego scheme with golden toilets again.
  • Legally obstructing truth: Environmental attorney Robert Bilott was obstructed so it would not become clear that PFOA's are doom, a bit like how big pharma (with Pfizer on top) has tried to legally shut down whistleblowers over the years. Or Australia going after Witness K who showed Australia's involvement in Timor, looking to expand oil and gas fields.
  • Lobbying and changing a healthy policy process aimed at the common good: The coal lobby is most notorious for this: Shell, EXXON, the Australian Greenhouse Mafia,...
  • Money from horror: US war hero Smedley Butler came to point out already in the 1930's how lots of US wars are not about protecting democracy but about business interests. And wars for business went on, accompanied by the CIA's torture interrogation methods which were uneffective yet continued. Luckily Daniel J. Jones brought that to light.
  • Sadism and no responsability: Politicians and 'entrepreneurs', lawyers, some woman who defends the interests of multinational companies.. their kids had a studentclub called 'Reuzegom'. It was about arrogance, the kids' elite status, and cruelty to animals, and then a student died. It stayed out of the news for a while, thanks to the social engineering of the connections of the suspects. With their rich and influential parents, despite a total lack of humanity, the kids had so far easily found their way in this society without working. Most had their own political connections already. An army of lawyers, paid by their rich parents, tried to blame the emergency doctor for the death, the one person doing his job, a job he shouldn't have been doing in the night. It is so telling for how our society works: this self-proclaimed elite is the 1%, and the murdered student is the environment.
  • Consumerism: Don't like your boring shopping mall environment? Consume more! Don't like the paved hell around you? Consume a hasty exotic trip! Pay for your escapism! Consumption is the solution to everything (not). There's a pill or drug for anything.
  • Consumerism’s stewards: Whose bread you eat, whose word you speak. Role models guide you on your very personalized way to spend money. Pick and buy your lifestyle and identity.
  • No more voice: Entertainment and music channels, means, investments, personnel.. they have largely been taken up by corporations to serve the higher multinational funds. Not only has this led 1) to autotune and 2) to a replacement of culture by consumerism religion, but also 3) to the total absence of protest in songs. "There's only music so that there's new ringtones", Alex Turner sung debuting through an independent record label.
  • Corporate society and media appoint sketchy ambassadors for environmental movement: Goofs are sponsored who drive environmentalism in marginal political corners and in niche consumer lifestyles.
  • Black-and-white thinking: You don’t have to go all militant 100% vegetarian to change the world. But consumerist propaganda is simple: you either love meat like all the cool kids or you're an extremist. I'm not a vegetarian and I am strongly opposing industrial meat production with the horrorful fever dreams animals are rubbed in, certainly the severely tortured pigs. Last month in little Belgium (11 million inhabitants) 27 million chickens were killed and almost 1 million pigs. This ugliness in our societal behaviour is weighing on the environment. But there are these commercials of how healthy and cool overconsumption of meat is, just like cigarettes were advertised in the 1950's as recommended by doctors, and in the 2000's us milkloving children were taken to milk events by school to make us drink even more, even if we didn't want more, we had to have more, it was healthy, yet, the campaign was sponsored by the ministry of economy, not health.
  • Micro-consumerist choices: Our capacity to adapt our life is limited, regardless of our current standard, let's not spill that capacity. Yes you can change something. The battery of your electrical car, trawl fishing, cruise ships.. they kill, destroy and emit immensely and we can sabotage them, but most of the nowadays suggested adaptations are merely trivial if we don’t first make work of structural change, essentially change in power distribution. Live like a carless hermit in a car-world? You’ll lose. Saving gasoil? Good, price is lower so someone else is encouraged to combust just a bit more. Lots is a waste of time without regulation, without changing the influence-system steering the influencables which you and me are maybe also part of. (Of course nuance is always possible: micro-consumerist changes can be relevant for localized matters like water: your swimming pool or your sterile artificial grass are affecting your local watershed.)

These people know no hesitation when they drive us all to doom, down to dust, all that matters is the profit that can be made today, and they don't care if we'll see the sun go up again after the night, there is nothing in their minds, they'll give us dead sterile environments, welcome to the machine.

Change per se won't work. Anger and undirected efforts won't, but structural change will. Bye market religion, bye political-economical elite! Tackle lousy elite-serving governments! We all in our different specialisms have to unite in a collective effort for change! (Without the spilling of blood that comes when new power cravers take over from the old. We don't want a Robespierre or the murderous key figures of Russia from 1917 to 1953, they didn't bring much more humanity than the decadent French kings and Russian Tsars they claimed they had needed to overthrow.)