Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

OdiousOutlaw wrote

oh look some guy who thinks 99.9% of the earth's population should die

"I get literally all of my information on Anti-Civs and primitivists from COMPLETEANARCHY memes."

9

celebratedrecluse wrote

Like I have written in another post, it is disappointing that people who I otherwise agree with on a variety of political and social concerns, totally throw their sense of nuance out of the window when it comes to engaging with anti-civ or deep green ideology.

Graeber is a great writer, what a shame that they resort to such banality. I've also heard from people who ran into Graeber at the first OWS in NYC, that he comes across as a bit of a manarchist/anarcho-celeb when you talk in person. Kill yr idols, i guess.

5

ziq wrote

So many reactionaries on the left.

4

[deleted] 0 wrote

5

OdiousOutlaw wrote

I can't help but wonder if there is some direct correlation between calling yourself anarchist, writing books about anarchism, and becoming what is essentially a reformist.

3

existential1 wrote

Had no clue who the expressive egg org or person is before right now, but are they professing to be "the" arbiter of what anarchism is? Ie...not to what anarchism is to them, but what it is, period. I do agree with their take in this post for the most part, but I also come out of it thinking... "It's a lot easier to critique than build. With pieces like this, I sure hope they've written or done something of significance in some way. Because otherwise, they come off as, well, a weird version of their unofficial socialist. Professing to be 'better than thou' because of some relative position or stance without anything to show for it."

But idk...havent looked at all into them.

2

[deleted] 0 wrote

1

existential1 wrote

I wasn't making an argument that critique is bad, unnecessary, or overvalued. I am making an argument that the author is advocating for the 7 people (or their readers/supporters/critics) to be more radically honest about their lack of being "fundamentally anarchist" while not espousing that same level of honesty about themselves. It's more of a hypocrisy thing than a "merit" thing. It struck me as being an example of one of the critiques they had of Graeber's writings...not being fully hashed out and whatnot. Which is odd, considering that's what they're critiquing.

I could have communicated that better.

4