I think there is some overlap. Solarpunk is a bit more grounded in simple solutions that are needed now but long term I think we have somewhat similar goals.
Technically, I think solarpunk is both optimistic about technology and concerned with long-term issues, just not to the illogical extreme of some members of those movements.
I think Nausicaa or the valley of the wind would qualify, despite being more of a post-apocalyptic setting the overall morality of the film is very in line with solarpunk.
This is the issue I have with the article—it recognizes the problem but it doesn’t go far enough.
Having an uncle babysit once a month is barely different from the failed nuclear family model. I’m trying to find or build child-care that is truly communal.
Anti-natalism is a toxic, doomer philosophy. And I wish this post went into more detail on how we can rebuild communal child-care networks.
I’m currently trying to procreate but due to fertility issues I find myself behind the rest of my friends who have all disappeared into atomized, suburban lives. So I’ve been thinking a lot about how to avoid this fate. If anyone has insights please share.
Buildings with plants can totally be solarpunk. But obviously there’s more to it than that.
Well that’s kind of what I meant by taking long-term thinking to an illogical extreme. I’m not plugged into that community enough to say whether that is universal or just one voice among many. If that is the predominant view that we need to ignore present or even what most people would consider long-term problems in favor of trillions of future AI souls or whatever then I agree there is a bigger conflict.
I’ve not seen kurzegesagt saying anything like that though. Even in the video criticized above they are discussing the importance of dealing with climate change, albeit in a way that is not sufficiently critical of existing social structures.