Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

2

Dumai wrote

??????????????

1

ziq wrote

Um I'm literally the founder of dumaism...

1

jorgesumle wrote

Why did you found that in the Wiki? Do you know that f/anonymous has just modified it?

I am Ziq and I have made this page without listening to the arguments of the other, thus I am smart.

Bask in my intelligence, for I have the raw physical power to tear down endless amounts of straw, arranged even in the shape of a man.

0

ziq wrote

Kids should really stop abusing the anonymous accounts to attack me, it's pretty pathetic.

1

Dumai wrote

i'm laughing right now and i do not know why

1

ziq wrote (edited )

It's a response to you rejecting the postleft critique of morality the other day because 'some moral philosophers say something else... so postleft is wrong and you should stop talking about it' and now rejecting the postciv critique of primitivism because 'this primitivist philosopher says this is how it is... so postcivs should stop thinking otherwise'.

2

Dumai wrote

i mean i could already tell it was a strawman so that didn't clarify all that much

like in that conversation the other day i straight-up told you that you were free to disagree with the mainstream definition of ethics, all i wanted you to do was to be more comprehensive with your explanation so as not to confuse or mislead neophytes.

here all i'm saying the explanation of anarcho-primitivism you gave is far from exhaustive and it would probably help to represent the incredibly messy history of the movement with a little more nuance. like at least mention it, because i doubt anybody who's ever done any significant reading on anarcho-primitivism is unfamiliar with the currents moore describes in that article

1

ziq wrote

I think you were condescending and dismissive the other day. You can give your perspective without shitting on mine.

1

Dumai wrote

looking back at it now i can see how i'd come across that way and i probably should have been a bit more careful -- i still stand by what i meant and you definitely misinterpreted that but that might have been as much my fault as yours

but if i misrepresented post-leftism, simplified the movement to the point that it couldn't come across as anything but absurd, and failed to mention the possibility that it could be anything else, i'd hope somebody would flag me on that.

1

ziq wrote

You come off as dogmatic sometimes. When someone offers their perspective on a topic, you come in and link to some 'authority' giving their conflicting perspective decades ago to debunk them... and the conditions aren't even the same in 2018 as they were back then.

2

Dumai wrote

the reason i posted it is because it's still the best and most concise primer on anarcho-primitivism i know, and it immediately clears up a lot of common misconceptions about what it is, how it started, and why

it definitely should count for something that the most notable anprim contingent from the very start is nothing like what you said anarcho-primitivism is

even if you're of the opinion that anprims, by and large, do now behave the way you described (which i'm still not sure is true), it still probably should have warranted mention that they haven't always been this way and a lot of them still aren't

and also that you're not really gonna find any anarcho-primitivism of that sort in their foundational texts

i didn't post any of that with the intention of shitting on your perspective