I think this video was shared before.
It seems to be based on a very superficial understanding of the concept.Edit: actually the video is not the one I thought it was. Andrewism knows Solarpunk very well ofc, so this more of a video aimed at skeptics that are quick to dismiss the idea as too superficial.
why? I feel the same criticism has been developed more in depth by other people. The fact that there’s no social tension or politics implicit in the solarpunk aesthetic is a well-known problem. As is the general association of solarpunk with techno-optimism.
Also the video is not really criticizing the attitude or values of the “core” solarpunk writers and artists but more the reception in some internet circles. Let’s call it “base solarpunk”. That “base solarpunk” that exists in the mind of many is not a concept to be understood, but a forming ideology to be shaped that is just loosely coupled to solarpunk as an artistic aesthetic
Because Solar-Punk is precisely not just an “aesthetic”. Imagine someone saying Punk is just colored spiky hair, and you have about the same level of superficial understanding of Solar-Punk. But of course you will find people on Instagram claiming to be Punk now because they died their hair…
If you dig even just a tiny bit deeper, you will see that Solar-Punk is in essence a deeply Anarchist project… a sort of re-branded eco-version of it that was largely developed in response to primitivist / eco-fascist tendencies within the ecological movement.
But Solar-Punk is intentionally not so “in your face” political as it attempts to build a broader support base through diversified means, including art and lifestylism.
My biggest issue with solar punk is that people think they don’t have to change anything unsustainable about their lives because the tech will fix everything. “I don’t have to take the bus, I’ll just wait for Tesla’s new electric car that had ivy growing out of it!”
Tesla is solar punk?? It has punk in the name!
That was just an example, feel free to replace Tesla with any EV manufacturer.
Still, why EV cars and Solar Punk? Solar Punk is pretty anti car in general and rather imagines dense walkable cities with electric public transport.
Might just be the types of solar punk communities I used to frequent (and have since left) then.
I don’t have to take the bus
On a slightly different note, diseases like respiratory diseases are easier to spread in public transports. I was victim of that countless times… really not keen in using public transports bc of that
A good solarpunk should also include working from home as an option for any job that you can work from home on, and any good economic system should protect workers including their right to paid sick leave if they’re feeling unwell, as well as make service jobs like getting your groceries or food delivered not exploitative as fuck so you you’re not super morally conflicted when you need it.
I can agree with this reading of SolarPunk and it’s kinda how I’m using it too. Nonetheless this doesn’t make it more of an aesthetic. You’re shifting the frame from considering SolarPunk as a model to considering it a tool.
Indeed SolarPunk is “used”, like every utopia, to promote a specific political model that is not necessarily represented inside the utopic model, in its content, in its narratives. There’s more than one layer. You call it “not being in your face”.
The author of the video, I believe, doesn’t make this distinction. For him, SolarPunk is a blueprint and taken as a blueprint, it lacks a lot of stuff. You might conflate the aestethic with the intentions and ideas of those using Solarpunk for a political goal, but they are not the same. In the world out there, most people take SolarPunk as a blueprint without looking at the broader “deeply anarchist project” behind it and think “it’s that easy”.
The video correctly highlight that it’s not that easy. The criticism I would make is that the video suggests to embed a set of values, considerations and narrative elements to the aesthetic that will inevitably make it lose its appeal as an utopia and fail in its purpose as a tool for agitation and the creation of desires.
That’s a fair take I guess. Although the author of the video is a relatively well known Anarchist and is surely aware of what I wrote.
Regarding your last point: you can’t really divide the means (aesthetics) and the desired outcome. If you do that your outcome will be inevitably different from what you set out to do. So while Solar Punk is not so in-your-face political, I think it also does not try to hide its Anarchist roots for anyone who bothers looking for them. If that turns away certain people that is probably for the better as otherwise those people would likely try to distort the idea of Solar Punk (which is a well recognized risk; green-washing and the like).
Related: https://yewtu.be/watch?v=AOndVouUSRA