Why?

[Guest]

Of anarcho-primitivism.

You want to take human nature, which in a nutshell is to better itself from generation to generation, and say "STOP!”? You want to take a lot steps backwards, to a point where the human race is effectively wild once more. An animal. Why? Because you believe that this is somehow a "better" way of life? That it would make every individual who lives in this way a happier person? Possibly. But the key thing that you're missing in this whole school of thought is that it has become, irreversibly, human nature to advance itself in every possible aspect. It is only through this civilisation that you have been able to develop these complex systems of thought. So with that in mind, you really have to question why mankind is the way it is. Is it really industry and various other forms of civilisation that has brought us to state that we live in? Is industry really possible to avoid? If it were, then you might have your ideal.
It wouldn’t matter if you achieved everything you could possibly imagine, and humanity returned to a wild way of life. It would lean towards civilisation like a flower to the sun. It is an absolutely, fantastically impossible idea. The fact that it is so developed is astounding.

[Zazaban]

I don't think anybody here is a primmie. We all agree with you.

[Guest]

Well that certainly is a shame.

[Guest]

I don't think anybody here is a primmie. We all agree with you.

wtf? try speaking for yourself...how the fuck do you know what "all" the people here think?

[Zazaban]

I don't think anybody here is a primmie. We all agree with you.

wtf? try speaking for yourself...how the fuck do you know what "all" the people here think?

Note that I said I don't think anybody here is a primmie. I certainly haven't seen any.

[thelastindividual]

Go to infoshop. They're crawling with primmies. The 'critique of technology' would be a good one to post in

[patrickhenry]

I would go to anarchist news if you want to chatter with primmies. they have a few also.

[patrickhenry]

I would go to anarchist news if you want to chatter with primmies. they have a few also.

[coup-detat]

I have a friend who is an anarcho-primitivist. She actually is pretty convincing, but I am not her and cannot argue for her. Some of my ideas kinda fall into primitivism, but I don't believe we should become savage animals. She actually lived in a tree for about a year before she decided to live in china. I like talking to primitivists, I think they're usually pretty nice people, though I can't speak for all of them.

[Zazaban]

I have difficulty standing primitivists. If there was at any point any number of vocal primitivists on this forum, I would have to leave.

[thelastindividual]

I agree with Zazaban. Primtivism is bullshit. The whole thing hinges on this assumption that humans aren't more important than ecological concerns/the environment and that technology won't develop to stop hurting the environment. For the first point we aren't objectively important but anyone who would kill members of their own species for the environment obviously has some issues, and secondly yes we can create renewable energies

[Zazaban]

Plus, I always get the vibe that they believe that, deep down, everyone in the world agrees with them and just won't accept it. I've even heard something like that stated a few times. I find that incredibly patronizing.

[|Y|]

There are two ways for anarcho-primitivism to turn into civilization.

1) Certian individuals within the group decide that their knowledge has more use to them if they keep it exclusive to themselves, therefore if they find a medicinal root that will help dull pain, they will use it to create a power concentration within their groups. This is almost universial in every modern primitivist tribe that we know (the Aka being a meager exception). This obviously leads to authoritarianism as the shaman has power concentration, and can give that power concentration to his or her subordinates, and the chain continues, and is difficult to break, because from a position of power you can do less to get more benefits (sitting in a hut all day having food brought to you is more beneficial than having to hunt it for yourself). Since we've agreed, as a primitive society, that this structure is acceptable, we wind up practicing it in all areas. Once we have agriculture we start creating distinctions between one tribe or another, feigning to fight them and create war than to be one with them, and to solve problems (such as in times of famine). We wind up with a class sturcture where kings or warlords control populations and get fed for doing very little except look scary.

2) Everyone in the primitivist group shares knowledge equally, if there is a medicinal root that is valuable, all know where to get it, what the plant looks like, and how much of it is good or how much of it is harmful. This leads to a society that doesn't allow for power concentration because all individuals take for granted the free acquisition of knowledge and share it with ease. Any new innovations, like the discovery of seeds making plants, and further the utilization of agriculture, can then be shared by all, equally. This would lead to an anti-authoritarian environment.

However, the primitivist ideology is *preconditioned* on the fact that knowledge should not be sought, therefore the second scenario is practically impossible. That is, the first scenario is going to happen regardless because of the benefits to such a scenario. Indeed, many primitivists find virtue in the shamanic class structure, because they have a spiritual view of reality rather than scientific.

[|Y|]

Note that the analysis also includes the "hunter class" which exists in most modern tribes too. Even the Aka had a "hunter class" which only went away when colonialism created an environment where they no longer could hunt big game (thus making "the most egalitarian primitive tribe, the most egalitarian society on the planet" a result of colonialism). When the men could no longer bring home enough biomass for the society, the women started partaking in the hunt (bringing along their own babies, and dropping them to the ground whenever they needed both hands! Really!).

[Zazaban]

I have a feeling primmies ultimately care about 'what is natural' or 'what is supposed to be' more than freedom or equality. Again, this sort of leads back to the mystic spiritualist worldview, that there is some esoteric 'way' that things are intended to be and that humans are upsetting some vague spiritual force.