Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

not_Bezotcovschina wrote

Is it too late for my galaxy-brain takes?

Anyway:

It seems to me that both sides here are fighting straw-men and "projecting totalitarism", like:

I have no interest in community service since that involves working; I don't care if it's "unionized" or "collectivized". And since antiwork sentiment exists, I doubt I'm the only one.

but

Reds always think all other groups are totalitarian because you're projecting.

Like, do primitivists really think that "red" anarchists will hunt them and chain to machinery or what? Projecting much?

Meanwhile, do "red" anarchists assume that primitivists dream about torching collectivized horisontal medical equipment factories? Or, I don't know, killing anyone participating in your community garden project for doing agriculture?

The hardest thing in my life was ditching utopian thinking about fit-all solutions.

ziq once said that they have a power to persuade anyone into anything, so I don't want to publicly admit his critique of civilization and industry makes a lot sense for me just to deny them any power over myself, but, in fact, it does makes a lot sense for me. All my respect and support to those who managed to get rid of the chains of civilization and become free and wild. I wish I could.

I also don't mind workers taking means of production from their "bosses", if they think that their job is vital for community. I can see how these workers can be rewarded by community for their labor. I can see possible downfalls on this way, but don't think they are unavoidable.

I don't know a shit about you, so I'm not choosing a path for you!

P. S.: I'm afraid I use too much "I"'s in my comments.

2

ziq wrote (edited )

Like, do primitivists really think that "red" anarchists will hunt them and chain to machinery or what? Projecting much?

Anarcho-communism / collectivism are social systems - ways that society is run and labor is organized. I say it's "totalitarian" because everyone in the society has to live by the system. If they don't, they're excluded from society. You can't opt out of a social system without being punished by the system in various ways. With civilization (and ideologies that revolve around civilization) there's literally zero way to opt out because the climate is so affected by the system, forcing everyone to feel its devastating effects whether they participate in the society or not. That's why civilization is totalitarian. It's not voluntary.

I'm not a primitivist, I'm just an anarchist.

5

Bezotcovschina wrote (edited )

I'm not a primitivist, I'm just an anarchist.

Yes, I'm here long enough to know who you are. Me too.

Sorry, I know you've already wrote like gigabytes of answers to questions like this, and I've read some of them, so you may not answer if you don't want to.

I... hmmm... No, I don't think that anarcho-communism necessary implies any specific social system. Maybe, it's a strain of "communism", that makes someone assume it dictates how society should be organized. Reading some classical theoretics of anarchism (not like I really care what long-dead white males thought, for a record), nothing says that anarchism should always be practiced in a way of labor coops and such. Maybe some other classical (or modern) theoretics, I'm unaware of, claimed that the only way to establish anarchism is collectivized factories and rigid social systems?

I mean, I don't care if it anarcho-communism, anarcho-primitivism, anarcho-transhummanism, anarcho-whatever - it either is anarchy or isn't.

And, about "totalitarism" of workers coops: no, I can't see how workers coops are totalitarian. Like, really, how? People want to do something in horizontal organized manner - the rest of community either appreciate it or not. And if not, they won't, probably, do it and go to grow food forests or something instead. Where is a totalitarism? It's no more "social system" then hunter-gatherer society.

If by "totalitarism" you mean (and I know you are) a destructive effect on environment, then I agree with you. But I'm not sure that the only way to avoid it is go full hunter-gatherer. I don't know, maybe it actually is, or, maybe, it's possible to, I don't know, grow mushrooms in your basement without much harm to nature.

P. S.: it's, probably, my longest comment, and I've wrote down my thoughts as they came to me, so there might be some inconsistencies. My apologies.

P. P. S.: reading it the second time - is it just me, or it's not only inconsistent, but also passive-aggressive somewhat? If so, I really didn't mean it.

P. P. P. S.: basically, just thinking at loud.

2

OdiousOutlaw wrote (edited )

I have no interest in community service since that involves working; I don't care if it's "unionized" or "collectivized". And since antiwork sentiment exists, I doubt I'm the only one.

Alright, that was pretty dickish of me, ngl. I'll even admit that I ignored their previous stated sentiment that they don't believe in "one-size-fits-all-solution".

I'm no primitivist and I believe that there are a bunch a valid critiques to be levied towards them without resorting to calling them genocidal or saying that their ideology necessitates or requires genocide/mass death. Because they aren't and it doesn't.

As a show of good faith, I'll shit on primitivists from both a "red" and "black" angle, without the false accusations of having to kill people:

Primitivists don't really open any avenue towards building any sort of community in any meaningful sense, there is no significant primitivist project to actually help people escape from civilization; the people who will suffer the most under ecological collapse also happen to be the ones who contribute to it the least.

The primitivist lifestyle is entirely unappealing to those of us who are reluctant to leave our connections to civilization behind; most people have friends or family that have no interest in leaving civilization.

Primitivism is a safety raft with a hole in it; even if one learns how to live off of the land, it means nothing once that land is devastated by climate collapse. You can't hunt if the food chain is irreparably fucked up, you can't forage if the plants are dried up, you can't drink from a dried out river.

Primitivism is most easily available to those who are willing and able to live without any immediate medical aid, have the time to learn basic survival skills that civilization has ensured that were forgotten (i.e. not having to work), are in an area within traveling distance in which nature can actually provide the means for them to survive without having to deal with people enforcing property laws. It is a "solution" for a select few.

2

Bezotcovschina wrote (edited )

<З - my first emoji in, like, 12 years, only for you.

2