Welcome to our collection of articles dedicated to green politics. As our world grapples with pressing environmental and societal challenges, the green political movement emerges as a beacon of change.
These articles explore core areas of green politics such as: degrowth, demilitarization, union and worker rights, and anti-capitalism.
Discover the nuances of degrowth as we examine strategies to reshape economies, moving away from military and capitalist growth models toward a more balanced, regenerative approach. Explore the imperative of demilitarization, unraveling the environmental and social impacts of excessive military expenditures, and delving into proposals for redirecting resources towards constructive, peace-building endeavors. Anti-capitalism is a key theme, challenging the prevailing economic systems that prioritizes profit over people and the environment. Union and worker rights in politics is another key area. Our articles dissect the green political stance on restructuring economies to prioritize social justice, environmental sustainability, and community well-being.
This thought-provoking content analyzes the intersectionality of these principles, offering insights into how green politics seeks to create a world where ecological responsibility, demilitarization, and anti-capitalist values converge for the betterment of society and the planet.
We hope you enjoy these explorations of the progressive ideals of green politics, providing you with valuable perspectives, informed analyses, and potential solutions to the challenges we face. Stay engaged, informed, and inspired, and let’s pave the way toward a future guided by the principles of degrowth, demilitarization, and anti-capitalism.
Examines activities of the US left (broadly speaking) over the last 25 years or so, asks some hard questions, makes some strong claims, and hopefully stimulates critical thinking about what can we learn from the past to utilize and build upon in the future.
Iran is cast as a master chess player in Western discourse—but this analogy obscures more than it reveals. Drawing on history, from the 1979 revolution to today’s war dynamics, this piece argues that Iran’s strength lies not in tactical brilliance alone, but in a deeper social resilience that defies conventional military logic. Unlike fragile, top-down regimes, Iran operates as a living political network, capable of regeneration despite external pressure. The real miscalculation of Washington and Tel Aviv is not strategic—it is conceptual. If Iran is rewriting the rules of the game itself, then the old playbook of domination may already be obsolete.
During the invasion of Cuba at Playa Girón, the attackers’ air force had around 30 aircraft, including B-26 bombers and C-46 and C-54 transport planes used to drop paratroopers and provide logistical support for the landing. On the Cuban side, in April 1961, the revolutionary air force could barely muster eight operational aircraft: a few Sea Fury fighters, a couple of T-33 jets, and a handful of B-26s recovered after the fall of Fulgencio Batista’s dictatorship.
Dan Kovalik and Jeremy Kuzmarov’s Syria: Anatomy of a Regime Change was published on September 1, 2025. What can it teach us now that the empire has pulled the trigger on three more nations resisting its drive to dominate?
Why has U.S. policy toward Iran repeatedly failed despite decades of pressure, sanctions, and intervention? This essay argues that the problem is deeper than geopolitics: it is a civilizational misreading. From the 1953 coup to the nuclear dispute, Washington has approached Iran as a strategic threat rather than a historical society shaped by memory, sovereignty, and identity. Sanctions and coercion have hardened, not softened, Iran’s stance. The result is a cycle of mistrust and escalation. Without understanding Iran on its own terms, U.S. power remains ineffective—trapped in a pattern where force replaces insight and policy reproduces the very conflict it seeks toresolve.
Reports of 1-year-old Karim Abu Nassar being burned with a cigarette and pierced with a nail followed the publication of a United Nations analysis detailing Israel’s “systematic” torture of Palestinians since October 2023.
Trump’s latest National Security Strategy echoes an old and dangerous ideology — the revival of the “White man’s burden.” Historian Juan Cole argues that the Trump administration’s rhetoric on immigration, Europe, and global power reflects a disturbing embrace of White nationalist thinking reminiscent of early 20th-century colonial and fascist ideas. By portraying multicultural democracy as “civilizational decline” and promoting fears of demographic replacement, Trump’s worldview aligns with far-right narratives that once fueled some of history’s darkest chapters. This essay examines how such ideas are resurfacing in contemporary geopolitics and warns of the global consequences if racialized imperial thinking again shapes international policy.
