1 files changed, 0 insertions, 53 deletions
diff --git a/chapter3.md b/chapter3.md
index 3ea011f..cfbb06e 100644
--- a/chapter3.md
+++ b/chapter3.md
@@ -12,56 +12,3 @@ In the previous two chapters, I've explored how and why contemporary green
 rhetoric is too often failing, and argued that the apocalyptic form is not one
 of the root causes. In this chapter, I aim to show that when green rhetoric
 succeeds, it draws much deeper on apocalypse than catastrophic narratives do.
-
-The Apocalypse of St John is written from below and primarily written to readers
-reading from below. He places their struggles in a larger context: of a cosmic
-battle between Jesus Christ and legions of demonic powers, a battle which will
-be ultimately won by Jesus, delivering a world free from all evil, oppressive,
-life-denying powers. He thus exhorts his audience to keep resisting the powers
-of evil which oppress them.
-
-How does this rhetoric work for John's subaltern audience? Large parts of this
-are impossible now to reconstruct. John probably wanted his audience to stop
-eating food that had been sacrificed to idols. What serious problem was this
-supposed to solve? How was it supposed to solve it? We can't know for sure. What
-we do know is that his audience were capable of following his exhortation. Thus,
-if the rest of John's analysis, which is lost to us now, stacked up, he would
-have identified an audience that could credibly make a difference. The question
-that remains is: why would it be good for his audience to act in this way?
-
-John's vision serves to answer that question. He does it by nesting their small,
-local, temporary action in a much larger cosmic and eschatological context.
-While he doesn't deny that their action cannot bring about large-scale social
-change -- in fact, he emphasises their relative powerlessness -- he shows how
-their acts of resistance meaningfully participate in a much bigger social
-transformation. By resisting the temptation of the Beast, they are anticipating
-and securing their privileged place in a future where the Beast is destroyed,
-and in its place is its mirror image, the New Jerusalem. In contrast, those who
-submit to the Beast and take on her mark are only participating in her
-destructive, suicidal death-drive.
-
-This is in fact just what green rhetoric needs.
-
-First rhetors need to fix all the first three points. They need to correctly
-diagnose the problem, identify a credible route to a credible solution, and
-address an audience that can make a difference. This can be done in the way the
-@{climate-change-class-war} does it, by exhorting workers in strategic sectors
-to force change by threatening industrial action. But Huber is too pessimistic
-about the power of the PMC: they can also bring about social-scale change
-through their power over the state via the political parties and the civil
-service.
-
-The question that remains in both cases is: why is it good for me to take part?
-Just because collective action is good for me doesn't mean that my individual
-participation is, too. Most collective action suffers from the prisoner's
-dilemma. It follows that what we need is a martyrdom ethic: I am prepared to
-sacrifice myself for the greater good. How can martyrdom be good for me?
-
-Apocalyptic rhetoric provides the solution by revealing how individual actions
-participate in cosmic battles and eschatological futures.
-
-Socialist rhetoric is often excellent at doing this: joining a union becomes
-part of a cosmic battle between the proletariat and capital, and participates in
-an eschatological future where the rule of capital is broken and the means of
-production are socialised, and are thus all the wonders of scientific technology
-are harnessed to the interests of everyone instead of the few.