Comments
Archaplain OP wrote
i didnt even see that, wtf.
ruinsociety wrote (edited )
The hate towards anprims is ridiculous. How is their ideology better? Do they not realize what they want will further poison the Earth and harm themselves and the environment? The nerve of these people.
tuesday wrote
Talking about poisoning the Earth and the harm that humans cause to the ecosystem is doomer shit. /s
moonlune wrote
they believe that anprims want collapse.
lettuceLeafer wrote
Wait do many anti civ types not want collapse? Not bc dead n suffering but a chance in life where they imagine they have more autonomy.
moonlune wrote
they believe that collapse is the natural consequence to civilization. More similar to a law of nature than a political theory's endgame.
There are probably some that are waiting for it yes, in the way you wait for a thunderstorm on a hot day.
But they're not trying to accelerate collapse, because of the death n stuff. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but iirc this is a major difference between anprims and right wing primitivists who try to accelerate collapse.
lettuceLeafer wrote
I mean yeah wanting something and being an accelerationist are very different things. Anti civ anarchists don't wanna cause collapse but some do hope for it to happen.
monday wrote
It's like cognitive dissonance plus ideology addiction. We are not immune to it though, maybe if go deep with egoism and Stirner (also nihilism I guess) not but at the end we create the lies we want to be told
monday wrote
But to be fair, just a Disclaimer (!?): Unfortunately, all the Anti-civ types I met irl were cringe people with a low interest in theory and tainted love to conspiracy, usually they would fringe eco-fascist ideas unknowingly. ITS for example, started with eco-extremist discourse to become a luciferian/fascist bent group with random violence apologia.
Green anarchy still a thing besides that, many will try to buy acceptance with solarpunk, permaculture and other escapist approaches... I dunno, social Anarchists are just obtuse sometimes
tuesday wrote
I appreciate how there are so many people trying to explain the idea of a theoretical lens, rather than a practice or a plan for the future and the responses being like BUT ONE TIME ON REDDIT I SAW A PRIMMIE SAY THAT THEY WOULD MURDER PEOPLE PERSONALLY FOR BEING DISABLED AND TRANS.
Why is their default assumption then that the whole theory is trash rather than that person is trash?