Idk why you think it has to have theory or praxis to be a movement. It does have a manifesto but I kinda doubt you care about that. There’s enough people that are interested in the topics that solarpunk encompasses to give it legitimacy.

I was interested, actually. I read through it, a lot of things people say they stand for and against, and what types of art styles they like and envision, but no actual theory or praxis behind it.

I already stated why it needs a strong ideological backbone to avoid being taken advantage of by ecofascists, but I’ll restate it: bad actors can and will use the aesthetic to push alternative messaging, just like what already happened to cottagecore.

Tbh your position is kinda disenfranchising to people that got into gardening, anti consumption, diy, gurilla grafting or any other facet of solarpunk because of it being under the umbrella.

Those are certainly good things, I never stated that Solarpunk is only “bad,” in fact I think many good things have come from it. However, to paint it as a place of “happy communists” when there have been ecofascists using it to push their messaging, is a bit off, hence why I pointed it out and explained my issues with it overall.

Idk why you think it has to have theory or praxis to be a movement.

If it doesn’t have ideas and it isn’t testing those ideas through social practice it isn’t a movement?