this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2026
233 points (99.2% liked)

technology

24394 readers
184 users here now

On the road to fully automated luxury gay space communism.

Spreading Linux propaganda since 2020

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] LittleFellaNamedBoof@hexbear.net 20 points 1 week ago (14 children)

This is a false framing of the actual dynamic at play. The problem is not the unmonetizability of it. This IS an issue to certain capitalist forces but the much more serious problem in the eyes of the capitalist state is that solar is decentralized. Centralized power production relies on infrastucture controlled by the capitalist. Even a personal home generator needs fuel to function. Which must be bought from those who control oil supplies. Solar once bought is entirely decoupled from their control. You can have solar panels and they cannot cut you power off anymore. It is an issue of power. Not the electric kind but the political kind. Controlling energy gives a person significant power of a society. Part of this is the ability to monetize that control but it is also simply a mechanism for control. The proletariet is seen as a threat by the capitalist and so any technology or policy that would remove direct control over the lives of proles is a threat. If they cannot cut off our power it removes a way for them to stop us from rebelling against them. Food and water supplies are also centrally controlled for this region. In many regions it would be cheaper and make more sense to grow much of our own food locally and have small well or rain catchment water systems. These are not used as they would destroy central control over the proles means to live. Making the prole a threat that cannot easily be neutralized. "Off-grid" living will always be something they attempt to discourage and make possible only for the wealthy. As to live truly off grid would mean to break free from the majority of the control mechanisms that are used to keep you subservient.

[–] FreedomAdvocate 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (9 children)

Having solar panels does not mean “they” can’t cut your power off and ruin your life.

The sun doesn’t shine 24/7, and the amount of batteries you’d need to be able to be completely off grid is prohibitively expensive.

“They” still have you by the balls.

[–] red_giant@hexbear.net 20 points 1 week ago (2 children)

This is a good argument for utilities and natural monopolies to all be state owned and operated.

It’s a social good to use solar and if the market is not able to operate in a way that enables a social good, then clearly markets are the wrong choice for economic management of the power grid.

[–] FreedomAdvocate 1 points 1 week ago

This is a good argument for utilities and natural monopolies to all be state owned and operated.

I agree wholeheartedly, basic utilities should all be publicly owned.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)