slime-dog

[slime-dog]

[slime-dog]

PREHISTORIC PROTO-MONKEY: I don't need ascorbic acid. From my cells. I eat fruit all the time dude. I'm better than that OTHER PREHISTORIC PROTO-MONKEY: I agree with your lifestyle and will fuck you raw to prove it GUY LOOKING FOR THE NORTHWEST PASSAGE 36,530,125 YEARS LATER: ow oof my shitty british teeth

[slime-dog]

hey wait a minute

[slime-dog]

i love reading classics scholarship from the early 20th century and having it inevitably start off with something insane like this

[slime-dog]

I'm asking this genuinely, as a 19 yo with no education in economics and a pretty surface level understanding of socialism: can you explain the whole Bananas discourse in a way someone like me might understand? In my understanding it's just "This is just a product we can give up to create better worker conditions and that's fine" but apparently that's not the full picture?

alright so some pretty important background to all this is that we're all talking about the fact that bananas, grown in the global south, are available year-round at extremely low prices all around europe and the USA. it's not really about bananas per so--the banana in this discourse is a synechdoche for all the economic benefits of imperialism.

so how are cheap bananas a result of imperialism? first of all i want to tackle a common and v. silly counterargument: 'oh, these ridiculous communists think it's imperialist for produce to be shipped internationally'. nah. believing that this is the communist objection requires believing in a deeply naive view of international traide. this view goes something like 'well, if honduras has lots of bananas, and people in the usa want bananas and are willing to pay for them, surely everyone wins when the usa buys bananas!'.

there are of course two key errors here and they are both packed into 'honduras has lots of bananas'. for a start, although the bananas are grown in honduras, honduras doesn't really 'have' them, because the plantations are mostly owned by chiquita (formerly known as united fruit) dole, del monte, and other multinationals--when they're not, those multinationals will usually purchase the bananas from honduran growers and conduct the export themselves. and wouldn't you know it, it's those intervening middleman steps--export, import, and retail, where the vast majority of money is made off bananas! so in the process of a banana making its way from honduras to a 7/11, usamerican multinationals make money selling the bananas to usamerican importers who make money selling them to usamerican retailers who make money selling them to usamerican customers.

when chiquita sells a banana to be sold in walmart, a magic trick is being performed: a banana is disappearing from honduras, and yet somehow an american company is paying a second american company for it! this is economic imperialism, the usamerican multinational extracting resources from a nation while simultaneously pocketing the value of those resources.

why does the honduran government allow this? if selling bananas is such a bad deal for the nation, why do they continue to export millions of dollars of banans a year? well, obviously, there's the fact that if they didn't, they would face a coup. the united states is more than willing to intervene and cause mass death and war to protect the profits of its multinationals. but the second, more subtle thing keeping honduras bound to this ridiculously unbalanced relationship is the need for dollars. because the US dollar is the global reserve currency, and the de facto currency of international trade, exporting to the USA is a basic necessity for nations like honduras, guatemala, &c. why is the dollar the global reserve currency? because of usamerican military and economic hegemony, of course. imperialism built upon imperialism!

this is unequal exchange, the neoimperialist terms of international trade that make the 'global economy' a tool of siphoning value and resources from the global south to the imperial core. & this is the second flaw to unravel in 'honduras has a lot of bananas' -- honduras only 'has a lot of bananas' because this global economic hegemony has led to vast unsustainable monoculture banana plantations to dominate the agriculture of honduras. it's long-attested how monoculture growth is unsustainable because it destroys soil and leads to easily-wiped-out-by-infection plants.

so, bananas in the USA are cheap because:

the workers that grow them are barely paid, mistreated, prevented from unionizing, and sometimes murdered

the nations in which the bananas are grown accept brutally unfair trade and tariff terms with the USA because they desperately need a supply of US dollars and so have little position to negotiate

shipping is also much cheaper than it should be because sailors are chronically underpaid and often not paid at all or forced to pay to work (!)

bananas are cheap, in conclusion, because they're produced by underpaid and brutalized workers and then imported on extortionate and unfair terms.

so what, should we all give up bananas? no, and it's a sign of total lack of understanding of socialism as a global movement that all the pearl-clutching usamericans have latched onto the scary communists telling them to stop buying bananas. communism does not care about you as a consumer. individual consumptive choices are not a meaningful arena of political action. the socialist position is not "if there was a socialist reovlution in the usa, we would all stop eating bananas like good little boys", but rather, "if there's a socialist revolution in the countries where bananas are grown, then the availability of bananas in the usa is going to drop, and if you want to be an anti-imperialist in the imperial core you have to accept that".

(this is where the second argument i see about this, 'oh what are you catholic you want me to eat dirt like a monk?' reveals itself as a silly fucking solipsistic misunderstanding)

and again, let's note that the case of the banana can very easily be generalised out to coffee, chocolate, sugar, etc, and that it's not about individual consumptive habits, but about global economic systems. if you are donkey fucking kong and you eat 100 bananas a day i don't care and neither does anyone else. it's about trying to illustrate just one tiny mundane way in which economic imperialism makes the lives of people in the global north more convenient and simpler and so of course there is enormous pushback from people who attach moral value to this and therefore feel like the mean commies are personally calling them evil for eating a nutella or whatever which is frankly pretty tiring. Sad!

[slime-dog]

It's been five years since Pusha T empowered Drake to stop the cycle, put family over money, and become a real father. Hiphop can be so beautiful, thank you Pusha!

[slime-dog]

i like halo 3 a lot more than phoebe bridgers

[slime-dog]

they should make those tourism websites for cities but instead its for things to do when you live there your entire life. What do i do lol

[slime-dog]

[slime-dog]

Cocteau Twins ‎– Sunburst And Snowblind 12″

[slime-dog]

[slime-dog]

one of the best youtube comments ill ever see. so universal

[slime-dog]

Mike Jones feat. Slim Thug and Paul Wall - Still Tippin’ (Official Video…

[slime-dog]

[slime-dog]

[slime-dog]

[slime-dog]

Bill Orcutt Guitar Quartet - Roulette, Brooklyn, New York, March 27, 2023 / Tiny Desk Concert

Here's what I wrote about Bill Orcutt's Music for Four Guitars for Aquarium Drunkard's year-end roundup: "A multitracked electric guitar masterpiece, [it] offers a richly layered trip. As with everything Orcutt does, there’s a wild intensity at work, but the interlinked compositions here could also work as meditation soundtracks. Orcutt continues to surprise." 

Most surprising, perhaps, is that Orcutt managed to take Four Guitars on the road this year. He brought with him some serious underground ringers to bring this stuff to life: Shane Parish, Ava Mendoza and Wendy Eisenberg. Thanks to Parish's notations, the quartet hews closely to the original compositions, but in a live setting, things open up and flow, creating a truly heady listening (and viewing) experience. Knotty, gnarly, totally beautiful. The musicians also seem to be having a blast playing together, which is always a plus in my book.

And hey, the Bill Orcutt Guitar Quartet is playing in Los Angeles TONIGHT. I'd go if I were you.