Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

0

365degrees wrote

deciding the death of like a billion people is good praxis

what's wrong with that????????

stupid

now that's ableist

5

Dumai wrote

how many times are you gonna say this shit about primitivists before you sit down and actually read anything written by an anprim and realise it's bullshit

-2

365degrees wrote

That's hardly a reliable source. The only thing I could trust an anprim to do is sugarcoat the bullshittery they're going to get everyone in.

5

Dumai wrote

so you're going to critique primitivist ideology without actually reading any of it

great

have fun

0

____deleted____ wrote

i mean personally i wouldnt waste time reading an ideology id immediately dismiss

i havent read mein kampf but im not a fan of hitler; reading someones own books about the ideology is generally a waste of time unless you already have some interest in it

3

Dumai wrote (edited )

i mean with regards to hitler, we already have historical evidence nazism is a human travesty. you might not know the ins-and-outs of nazi racial pseudo-science but i'd be seriously surprised to find anyone who doesn't know nazism is a platform of genocide. nazi germany literally enacted a genocide.

it's quite different with obscure radical tendencies like primitivism? most people who've even heard of it only know of it via internet memes? that misrespent it entirely? hands up if you thought anarcho-primitivists want to return to the stone age. if you did, you were wrong. which you'd know if you'd read any primitivist theory!

1

____deleted____ wrote

oh yeah ive put basic reading into most things but if you tell me to read the book of, say, Lenin, ill tell you to eat my ass because ill never take leninism into consideration

at least reading the fuckin wikipedia page is important but reading entire books is a waste of time

4

Dumai wrote (edited )

well as much as dislike lenin i'm very much interested in deconstructing his thought on a higher level than just reading his wikipedia page and forming an opinion from there

like how i am i supposed to argue with a leninist on any level higher than "uhh authority is bad" if i don't know how they think

3

GrimWillow wrote

While I agree with you about not needing to read everything, I wouldn't condemn the person for it unless they started spreading misinfo about subjects they never read about...while maintaining an obstinate refusal to even acknowledge that it's misinfo when called on their shit by those who have actually read something...

2

Dumai wrote

how do you know you'd dismiss it if you don't know anything about it?

i mean i've read a bit of anarcho-transhumanist stuff. which is how i know i disagree with it? how else would i know???

3

amongstclouds wrote (edited )

Because most leftists want their theory neatly packaged into half-read memes to gain social captial. It's tragic really.

They thrive on the attention of being willfully ignorant. This way when they get even a slightly emotionally involved reply they fall back on their 'rationality' and become stagnant. They prey on the emotional investments of others because they think it's radicool.

2

amongstclouds wrote (edited )

You could make memes pointing out some of the real problems with primitivism like the obvious fact it's utopic af.

Instead they make polio memes/"they're just lazy and dumb," because they conflate a critique of our use of technology as a call for the abolition of it as well and this is a reactionary response geared towards the preservation of industrial society.

1

ziq wrote (edited )

Who have make this decision? I dont see them?

Correct answer: because transhumanist not anarchist. Transhumanist liberal capitalist, make bad ideology.

1

____deleted____ wrote

jesus christ transhumanists and primmies are both anarchists

they can literally co-exist the point of anarchism is its all decentralized

i can go eat berries in bolivia or get a machine arm in california its not like one of the two has to be universally established

1

ziq wrote (edited )

No that isn't the point of anarchism. The point of anarchism is to burn down hierachies. All hierarchies. Not reinforce them by calling e.g. capitalism anarchist / voluntary / libertarian (ancaps). Or the just as hierarchy-prone example you just used.

Warping anarchism to mean 'my bourgie hobbies' i.e. 'my glorious privilege' will be the death knell to anarchism.

1

ziq wrote (edited )

Case in point: bitcoin is decentralized. And all it's done is allow the rich to buy lots of bitcoin and have yet another way to hoard their wealth and destroy the planet by burning fossil fuels.

Guess who came up with bitcoin? Ancaps. Can't wait to see what transhumanists come up with.