23 thoughts on “Occupy the Machine”

  1. Pingback: The Stimulator: Occupy the Machine « Dandelion Salad

  2. Blacquejacque

    Boy did you set off the right wing-nuts with that one!!!! w00t!!

  3. Blacquejacque

    oh wait … not this one, LAST weeks episode! D’oh!

  4. Theactivists

    he is right though, every single person reading this has atleast 3+ oil/coal facilities within 10 miles of them
    bring a BIC and a Bat

  5. bill english

    I’m totally disgusted with the like of Fox News mentality. I’ve watched three times since OWS began for less than 5 minutes each time, and it was all my stomach could stand. Many friends brainwashed by such, repeating rhetoric to me as if I am an un-American traitor, anarchist, communist (list gets worse, not better), as if I have become the enemy of all that is good about this country… and I feel like we’re making the last possible stand to save it. If extreme violence erupts, it is these news organizations that truly ‘incited a riot’. They should be held accountable NOW… not later! It may be too late. They know they are lying, are part of the corporate machine infecting the minds of so many with poisonous accusations with no basis in fact, totally misrepresenting us and putting the entire nation in extreme danger.

  6. Nice stuff, stimulator, or should I say, not so nice… when the grid goes down, the machine will stop.

  7. Occupy the Machine – Stop the 1%, Literally Our Bodies Will Be our Demand

    Imagine if we could stop the 1%, literally, not symbolically. It’s time to put our bodies between fossil fuels and what’s left of the planet, while there’s still time left.

    The focus on financial inequality versus the devastation of the earth is a false split. The 1% would have no wealth to steal without exploiting humans AND without exploiting the land. Without the landbase no one has anything, not the 99% and not the 1%. How much will it matter if our homes are not foreclosed if the Earth is unlivable due to runaway climate change? There’s only one home for all of us and we are almost done destroying it. Announcing, Occupy the Machine. We invite all occupiers to read the Occupy the Machine Open Letter, give feedback, and if you feel moved to do so, present it at an Occupy General Assembly or committee meeting near you.
    http://deepgreenresistance.org/occupythemachine/ (Thanks Frank Lopez!)

  8. anonymous

    We are not running out of hydrocarbon fuel sources that quickly. There is still a 73 year supply of cheap oil(cheap meaning able to produce gasoline for less then 4.10 2001USD/gallon assuming a 5% increase in demand compounded yearly) based on known recoverable reserves. And there is a 225-300 year supply of coal, assuming a 4% increase in demand compounded yearly. And a 150-200+ year supply of gas assuming a 4% increase in consumption compounded annually.

    My number was based on the current estimated known recoverable reserves from cratonic(on shore) oil drilling only, from various AAPG Bulletins. The peak oil graph you guys use alot on your sites is on the Hubbard Decline Curve. However this only counts proved recoverable reserves rather than known recoverable reserves. Proved means that you have 4 wells within the drainage radius of the proposed well site, which ensures that you will hit oil. Putting this way, proved reserves are for areas with active drilling, while known reserves are estimates based on geology but in sections of oil fields without enough active drilling to prove the reserve exists. I always used the lower estimates though, so the number should be as conservative as the current data allows. Hubbard Decline Curve is also optimized to predict decline of oil production from Texas limestones, in fields where all data is available(Texas law states that all companies have to give their well logs and production reports to the state and that they must be accurate), and that there are outside markets that cause diminishing returns from marginally producing wells. This was an excellent graph that tracked the production of Texan oil very well. However a graph showing the worlds production of petroleum as it is exhausted would be a descending plateau rather than a peak, since there is no outside source of oil to make the marginally producing wells undesirable. So instead of a 150 year rapid decline from a peak, you get a 70 year plateau and a steep drop off at the end.

    Who says we want a biosphere anyway? Of course it is much cheaper and easier to rely on it for the moment, but in a few hundred years it may be cheaper to eliminate it and replace it with human artifice. We won’t know until it becomes cheap enough to test out, but even today we could keep a few hundred thousand humans alive indefinitely without utilizing the biosphere. It would just be hard and ridiculously expensive to do so.

  9. stimulator

    Peak Oil or not, I guess it depends on who u ask. Doesn’t change the fact that oil lubricates the gears of industrial capitalism. Stop that shit, and you may well stop capitalism.

  10. anonymous

    >I guess it depends on who u ask
    The only credible source for pretty much anything is peer reviewed scientific journals because you have to submit your data and experimental methodology. That way you can actually analyze the data yourself and see if the model presented is predictive.

    The whole plan you present is impossible You will never get any appreciable number of people behind this, and there will be much vaster numbers of people that don’t want the elimination of industrial socity. And even elimination of oil would not halt industrial production.

    Even after the exhaustion of all hydrocarbon resources it would still be possible to make hydrogen to fuel internal combustion engines(methane engines are in common use today) using electrolysis. The only thing humanity really needs to continue industrial production is electricity. With enough electricity many things that are not currently economically viable become possible. And with nuclear breeder reactors U238 and Thorium can be breed into the nuclear fuels Pu239 and U237 respectfully. This will provide sufficient electrical generation capacity, assuming an 8.5% increase in the consumption of electricity compounded yearly for population of 10 billion for at least 30,000 years. Supplementing this with solar, wind, and water power will ensure our survival for the foreseeable future.

    Of course generating hydrogen through hydrolysis has a negative energy return. The point is that if you make electricity ridiculously cheap, which you can with nuclear breeder reactors, you can produce that hydrogen and sell it as fuel to make a bigger net profit than you would if you produced less electricity and sold it for a higher price per KW/hr. Currently you get back about 12/1 out of gasoline for the energy you expend to find, extract, and refine it from oil. But the average return for a non-breeder light water reactor the energy return is about 55/1(Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, can’t remember the number right now.). With a breeder reactor that return by be as high as 80/1 but lets assume it is 55/1. The best you can expect as a return from hydrogen produced through hydrolysis is about 1/3 if you are using the hydrogen in an internal combustion engine. So the return for hydrogen fuel produced solely by electricity derived from a U238 light water moderated fast breeder reactor would be 18.3/1. Which is still slightly higher than the return from modern petroleum, though not as high as the turn of the century return. Back then all oil wells were open flow(similar to artesian water wells) an gave you a return of over 100/1 since you didn’t have to drill, pump, or frac much.

    Now the ultimate long term plan for survival looks to an industrial base that could outlast the Earth and even the Sun itself. Detailed here: http://pastebin.com/zp79qR2v.

    The point is that if industrial society can exist indefinitely and even spread to other stars with technology we have today how is it not a superior survival strategy?

  11. stimulator

    Again, the point is no weather or not we have peaked in oil production. I believe we have and you don’t. Fine.

    We also disagree that coordinated actions could seriously damage oil infrastructure in order to push an economic collapse from which the great powers could not recover from, because you don’t believe that a movement couldn’t garner enough people to achieve this. I believe that this is possible.

    The cost and effort to retrofit the infrastructure of transport and extraction from oil to other fuels would take huge investments from industry and government and many years in the making. This is not happening at a speed that makes a significant to offset carbon emissions. Not to mention fossil fuel inputs (fertilizer and pesticides) that make industrial agriculture possible.

    What we do agree with is that the majority of people in the first world do not want to ditch their industrial lifestyles. But there are many of us who do not justify the destruction of nature in the name of “superior survival” We think that that attitude got us in this ecocidal predicament in the first place.

    If you want to move to mars, be my guest. I like it here on earth.

  12. Kewy Wichkewan
    Friends in conscience,

    Stim, ’nuff respect to all crew and be luvn ass always yer sanctified seditions.
    Anon, too true, what you say is mostly true, and with some AI we will be dust or immortal universe dancers.

    And true, it all comes down to this, dust or dancers…

    Yet today, and in the days past, the fuckshitmuddafukahs been killin billions of my people and the whole of Mother Earth. And fuck that and fuck them and fuck their system and fuck propriety and we will treat the earth and others with respect and the pychosociopatholoy will we wiped away like the diarrhea it is and we will move into the unlimited infinite future free of the sick notions of domination and superiority.

    We are all superior in some way. Even George W. Bush might prove to have the most efficient enzymatic processing of peptides in the sphincter, or some such achievement.

    The rage, the desire DJ and Stim express to the standing order of rolling creation under crap to wither and die is truth and logic and holy. Yes, you Godless ones, it is holy.

    Protect the light, protect the night, conserve, you conservatives. Because in the inverted reality, of course, thats half of what we are.

    You will note, of course, Stim and Anon, there is no conflict in your positions. Both have elements of truth. Will nuke power be important as we have it, probably no so much, but physics will remain. Forward we go, like it or not.

    But forward is about justice more than electricity.

    You either say screw this system of genocide and annihilation and exploitation
    or you serve it.

    Science and technology will keep going with a good or evil system.

    Even down to the last 50,000 folk.

    Just fight, just throw down and work your angles and fight for what is right and logigval and holy. We should preserve our milieu.

    Militarism, slash and burn economics, food manipulation…



    The Turtle Island Spring will be jasmine scented and unrelenting.

    The NWO will be you.

  13. Ruben Castilla Herrera

    Great video. I am grateful to the #Occupy movement because finally the middle (mostly white) of the %99 percent is understanding what many (specifically POC) have understood for as long as this country as been in existence. Finally we meet. Great to have your resources. #HastaLaVictoriaSiempre

  14. eldudeirino

    You sounded very credible and intelligent about the subject of oil/energy and so on, but you loose all credibility (sanity) when you talk about traveling to other stars and superior survival strategy, wtf? You can argue all you want that oil has 70+ years, but that’s also 70+ years of more carbon pumped into our atmosphere and continuation of political powers vying for control of those resources, and continued lubrication for the capitalist regime. The amount of resources isn’t the problem, its the fact that our society consumes these resources at high rates and that there is repercussions to this consumption. Just quoting a journal article doesn’t necessarily make that view and expert on that issue, there is still a little thing call experimenter bias, the $ that’s behind such an experiment (most research your referring to comes doesn’t come from independent sources, I mean who’s studying the oil consumption, Stanford? I think not, try an oil-garch’s). If i was to make a guess, your not a regular viewer or someone who supports this movement, which is fine, but I would like to know who your sugar daddy, errrr! what interest you represent, viva la revolution!

  15. A whole lot aw talking going on …
    The revolution starts within. Some of us know that we need to change .. not only our environment but everyday actions. Resist the State. That means STOP shopping at ShitMart, buying useless plastic from China,smoking government cancer sticks, wearing sweatshop t-shirts. Common sense and conscience. MOBILISE ORGANISE + RISE UP AGAINST THE MACHINE. The Occupation of the Forest Cafe, Edinburgh has begun. Bring you imagination this weekend! Spread the word. ZAPATA VIVE!

  16. Sorry, I got so carried away I forgot to prostitute my own shit.

  17. Dear Stimulator and any others that will read this,

    Have you seen the documentary “The Century Of the Self” by BBC?
    It’s a bit long (4 hours/4 parts) but worth to be seen.

    People discuss to much about what are the causes the problems without understanding the whole central issue, which is often forgotten: the minds of the people, how do they think (and how did they have been modeled).
    Only then we can understand how works the whole machine using their nasty propaganda and how to effectively fight it.

    Nobody will defend one cause that can’t understand.
    True knowledge is our biggest weapon against ignorance, our biggest enemy.

    Best regards,


  18. ps: It could be useful adding one edit button. (who will read*)

  19. Thanks for the link.
    Indeed he’s very good.
    BBC usually has very good professionals working there.
    Few weeks ago I have been addicted watching Louis Theroux’s stuff…

  20. Pingback: Frontenac, MO: Spraypainted “Occupy Portland” entryway costs the wealthy 1% $80,000 to replace « GREY COAST ANARCHIST NEWS

  21. anonymous

    Actually If you read the original comment you’d see that I complied that rough estimate from the American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin. Which is the most trusted scintific source for information on statigraphy, biostatigraphy, and hydrocarbon geology in the world. Whoever writes an article has to provide the journal with a detailed record of their data and experimental methodology. The data published in that journal is used by scientists in academia and industrial geologists, and has proven to be reliable for creating predictive models. The information has to accurate or it is worthless and no one would use it.The industry itself doesn’t make estimates for total hydrocarbon reserves nor does any university. The extimates are made solely from the data accumulated in 30 years worth of AAPG articles which gives a decent estimate on the economically recoverable reserves.

    The entire point of a scholarly journal is that anyone with the technical skill can take the data presented and check the findings.

    The point of the other stuff is this: living sustainably with the biosphere is not as effective a long term survival strategy was consuming it and the lithosphere.

    I don’t care about justice, equality, and happiness. Only survival matters to me. And sanity is for the weak.

Comments are closed.